Beyond 7.1.4... Multi-AVR set-up for Immersive Audio - Page 55 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 445Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1621 of 1968 Old 09-17-2018, 11:02 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
I got my "lift" chairs in for Geriatric Park, I mean Theater. Now I just have to replace the couch, add drapes and other room treatments, etc. It should seat six when I'm done (well technically already does since the couch can hold three) with three lined up with the center for best imaging plus another cushion chair I bring into the room to sit by the back door if I need to seat seven.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	GeriatricTheaterMark01.jpg
Views:	56
Size:	247.1 KB
ID:	2456414  
Aino and vn800art like this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1622 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 10:45 AM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Hi. I want to go 9.2.6

I have 6200w and plan to get 8500

So do I go

8500 9.2.4

6200w 9.2.2(middle top)

Or

8500 9.2.2(middle top)

6200w 7.2.4(FH RH)?

Thanks

Last edited by mp5475; 10-02-2018 at 11:14 AM.
mp5475 is offline  
post #1623 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 11:40 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1137 Post(s)
Liked: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
Hi. I want to go 9.2.6

I have 6200w and plan to get 8500

So do I go

8500 9.2.4

6200w 9.2.2(middle top)

Or

8500 9.2.2(middle top)

6200w 7.2.4(FH RH)?

Thanks
Set the 6200w to 9.2.2 and ignore the heights. Set the 8500 to 7.2.6 and connect the x.x.6.

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #1624 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 11:44 AM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
Set the 6200w to 9.2.2 and ignore the heights. Set the 8500 to 7.2.6 and connect the x.x.6.
I thought about doing this ,but seems to be a waste to use 8500 just for heights. Also I will not be able to use Audyssey app. And I think 8500 would just be better receiver to drive the rest of speakers.
mp5475 is offline  
post #1625 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 11:53 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mashie Saldana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1137 Post(s)
Liked: 962
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
I thought about doing this ,but seems to be a waste to use 8500 just for heights. Also I will not be able to use Audyssey app. And I think 8500 would just be better receiver to drive the rest of speakers.
You may as well sell the 6200w then and leave the 8500 as 9.1.4 as you will gain nothing with the other options.
Josh Z likes this.

Tower Cinema - 9.1.6 in a 12'x12' room
Input : Nvidia Shield TV, Panasonic DMP-UB400
Magic : Marantz SR7010, Marantz SR6010, 2x NAD T743
Output : Panasonic TX65EZ952B, SVS PB13 Ultra, Monitor Audio GSLCR 2xGS20 2xGS10 4xGSFX 6xBX1
Mashie Saldana is offline  
post #1626 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 12:50 PM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
You may as well sell the 6200w then and leave the 8500 as 9.1.4 as you will gain nothing with the other options.
Can I do 7.2.6 with 8500

And run the wides with 6200w?
mp5475 is offline  
post #1627 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 01:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
I thought about doing this ,but seems to be a waste to use 8500 just for heights. Also I will not be able to use Audyssey app. And I think 8500 would just be better receiver to drive the rest of speakers.
If you want "correct" 9.2.6, that is the only combination you can use with just those two receivers. You don't want to drive the fronts from the 8500H because they will contain duplicate information with the front wides, which with a phantom image would decrease the apparent position and cancel out half the front width effect and you still wouldn't get the Audyssey app for the speakers connected to the 6200 either way. You'll have to decide whether precise imaging is more important to you or Audyssey app adjustments. You could sell the 6200 and get a newer model that supports the app.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
Hi. I want to go 9.2.6

I have 6200w and plan to get 8500

So do I go

8500 9.2.4

6200w 9.2.2(middle top)

Or

8500 9.2.2(middle top)

6200w 7.2.4(FH RH)?

Thanks
If precise imaging isn't your primary concern, you could probably use either above, although I think the first is preferable for maximum Audyssey App application. You'll get duplicate channels either way in the heights (i.e. Top Middle will contain front height and rear height information also). Unlike what Mashie is saying (which is not accurate), you WILL get SOME improvement combining them. That is because duplicate information between two sets of speaker channels images in-between the two. Thus, Front Height + Top Middle that contains Front Height will image in-between the two sets of speakers (putting the phantom speaker location somewhere closer to the "Top Front" position rather than Front Height and the same for the rear speakers. If that compromise is acceptable to you (doesn't hurt to try it out), that should work for you. If it's not, then you either have to use the configuration above or ditch the 6200 and replace it with something else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mashie Saldana View Post
You may as well sell the 6200w then and leave the 8500 as 9.1.4 as you will gain nothing with the other options.
That is simply not correct, IMO. A phantom in-between still images further than either alone and gives overhead coverage in a larger room and thus that can hardly be called "nothing". Whether it sounds "better" than say just 9.1.4 would depend on the size of the room. I needed 6 overheads in my room to get even coverage as the angles were too low. A shorter room would probably function just fine with 9.1.4. The same is true of front wides. A narrow room will benefit less with front wides than a wider room. Thus, if one only had an 8500H, a shorter, wider room would likely do better with 9.1.4. A narrower longer room would probably do better with 7.1.6. Given he CAN get true 9.2.6 as he wants by your suggested original configuration (9.1.2 + 7.1.6), that would be the preferred method, IMO unless the room curves are so bad on automatic compared to the adjustable app that it's just unlistenable.
mp5475 likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1628 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 01:20 PM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
If you want "correct" 9.2.6, that is the only combination you can use with just those two receivers. You don't want to drive the fronts from the 8500H because they will contain duplicate information with the front wides, which with a phantom image would decrease the apparent position and cancel out half the front width effect and you still wouldn't get the Audyssey app for the speakers connected to the 6200 either way. You'll have to decide whether precise imaging is more important to you or Audyssey app adjustments. You could sell the 6200 and get a newer model that supports the app.



If precise imaging isn't your primary concern, you could probably use either above, although I think the first is preferable for maximum Audyssey App application. You'll get duplicate channels either way in the heights (i.e. Top Middle will contain front height and rear height information also). Unlike what Mashie is saying (which is not accurate), you WILL get SOME improvement combining them. That is because duplicate information between two sets of speaker channels images in-between the two. Thus, Front Height + Top Middle that contains Front Height will image in-between the two sets of speakers (putting the phantom speaker location somewhere closer to the "Top Front" position rather than Front Height and the same for the rear speakers. If that compromise is acceptable to you (doesn't hurt to try it out), that should work for you. If it's not, then you either have to use the configuration above or ditch the 6200 and replace it with something else.



That is simply not correct, IMO. A phantom in-between still images further than either alone and gives overhead coverage in a larger room and thus that can hardly be called "nothing". Whether it sounds "better" than say just 9.1.4 would depend on the size of the room. I needed 6 overheads in my room to get even coverage as the angles were too low. A shorter room would probably function just fine with 9.1.4. The same is true of front wides. A narrow room will benefit less with front wides than a wider room. Thus, if one only had an 8500H, a shorter, wider room would likely do better with 9.1.4. A narrower longer room would probably do better with 7.1.6. Given he CAN get true 9.2.6 as he wants by your suggested original configuration (9.1.2 + 7.1.6), that would be the preferred method, IMO unless the room curves are so bad on automatic compared to the adjustable app that it's just unlistenable.
How about 7.2.6 with the 8500 and wides with just the 6200w? It seems like perfect solution but what am I missing
mp5475 is offline  
post #1629 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 01:21 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
batpig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 29,328
Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4667 Post(s)
Liked: 4849
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
Can I do 7.2.6 with 8500

And run the wides with 6200w?
You can, but the wides will get duplicated content from other speakers if the X8500H doesn't "know" the wides are present.

For example, there could be a situation where the musical score is pulled into the wides if present, but if there are no wides it snaps down to the FR/FL mains. If you have the wides playing off the 6200 and the 8500 doesn't know the wides are present, then the musical score would be duplicated in both the wides and the FR/FL mains.
mp5475 likes this.

batpig's "Denon-to-English Dictionary"
Setup Guide and FAQ
http://batpigworld.com/

Become a fan "batpigworld.com" on Facebook!
batpig is offline  
post #1630 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 01:24 PM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by batpig View Post
You can, but the wides will get duplicated content from other speakers if the X8500H doesn't "know" the wides are present.
I figured. But I think this is better option than the using the 6200w for middle?

Last edited by mp5475; 10-02-2018 at 01:34 PM.
mp5475 is offline  
post #1631 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 01:25 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
How about 7.2.6 with the 8500 and wides with just the 6200w? It seems like perfect solution but what am I missing
I already said your "wides" will phantom in-between the front wide location and the front speakers if you do it that way because the 8500H would have NO IDEA that you are using front wides. Thus, any front wide information would be folded into the MAIN FRONT channels of the 8500H (thus duplicating the information).

I've said before that AVR makers COULD have provided a "combine AVR" mode to make this sort of thing work better (i.e. the AVR would then "know" to leave out said channels if it could be programmed to know another AVR is taking care of it). But this is probably really only for a small subsect and not really worth their time, especially if they think they can sell a yet "higher level" AVR at some point in the future to do 9.x.6.

Edit: I should say there is one other advantage currently to NOT using the 8500H for 6-channel overhead and using the "compromised" setup instead with duplicate Top Middle and that is DTS can't function with more than 11-channels currently on the 8500 and thus you would get ZERO output from the top middle speakers in that configuration. Only Atmos would function. With the compromised setup, you would at least get output from all channels, even if some phantom duplicates. Now whether this upcoming "Imax Enhanced" firmware update breaks the 11-channel limit for DTS, we'll have to see....

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 10-02-2018 at 01:31 PM.
MagnumX is offline  
post #1632 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 03:02 PM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
I already said your "wides" will phantom in-between the front wide location and the front speakers if you do it that way because the 8500H would have NO IDEA that you are using front wides. Thus, any front wide information would be folded into the MAIN FRONT channels of the 8500H (thus duplicating the information).

I've said before that AVR makers COULD have provided a "combine AVR" mode to make this sort of thing work better (i.e. the AVR would then "know" to leave out said channels if it could be programmed to know another AVR is taking care of it). But this is probably really only for a small subsect and not really worth their time, especially if they think they can sell a yet "higher level" AVR at some point in the future to do 9.x.6.

Edit: I should say there is one other advantage currently to NOT using the 8500H for 6-channel overhead and using the "compromised" setup instead with duplicate Top Middle and that is DTS can't function with more than 11-channels currently on the 8500 and thus you would get ZERO output from the top middle speakers in that configuration. Only Atmos would function. With the compromised setup, you would at least get output from all channels, even if some phantom duplicates. Now whether this upcoming "Imax Enhanced" firmware update breaks the 11-channel limit for DTS, we'll have to see....
I guess I will try both.

Just have hard time understanding why using wides from 6200 will narrow the sound stage, just because you get phantom imaging. The sounds cancel each other? But obviously I am very novice at this stuff.

thanks you for the input.
mp5475 is offline  
post #1633 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 03:33 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
I guess I will try both.

Just have hard time understanding why using wides from 6200 will narrow the sound stage, just because you get phantom imaging. The sounds cancel each other? But obviously I am very novice at this stuff.

thanks you for the input.
If you play an in-phase (meaning in common information from both channels that are aligned) signal from your left and right speakers using something like a stereo demo disc, what do you get? You get an image that is in the middle (center channel). This is how Pro Logic derives a center channel to send to the center speaker from a 2-channel signal. It extracts the in-phase information they have in common and removes it from the left/right signals and then you send it to a center channel speaker. If you just play the same signal in stereo without a center channel speaker, it images between them with what is called a "phantom image". That image is the information that is identical in the left and right channels. It images between them evenly.

Now if you have a signal that is supposed to go to your front wide channels (let's say the left front wide channel specifically) playing on one receiver and the second receiver is sending that SAME information to the MAIN channels instead (because it thinks you have no front wides and it doesn't want to throw sounds out or they'd be missing entirely), what you have is the same situation except the in-phase information in common is in the left front wide and the main left channel. So, that information phantom images the same as the stereo image would do, in the center point in-between the two. That is where you hear it. Thus, instead of the sound coming from the left front wide speaker, it will sound like it's coming from a point in-between the left front wide and the left main speaker. The net effect is that your front "wides" probably aren't as wide anymore as they would be if ONLY the front wides were playing.

That's not the full story, however because the information that would go to the front wides is folded into the front mains without them and this information is actually out of phase with the right channel (out of phase information tends to image outside the speakers instead of in-between them, although it may sound more "nebulous" depending on the speaker, etc.) when it's just the mains and thus it ends up imaging outside the main speaker anyway and MIGHT even end up in the same exact point where the physical speaker would go in a 7-channel setup (it depends on the speakers how well they image out of phase an whether you're sitting right in-between them at the MLP or not). This is one of the reasons why front wides aren't considered terribly important in the home environment as most home theaters aren't large enough to "need" front wides.

If you have a really large/wide room or multiple seats across, they could make a substantial improvement, but by duplicating the signals with the fronts, they're going to be less wide than if they were completely separate. You could possibly compensate for this (IF your room is wide enough) by moving the front wides further apart than normal so the phantom image ends up where you would have placed the front wides had they been fully separate.

I have a 12x24 room. I need 6 overheads to cover the length of the room or the imaging falls apart (angles are too far apart). The front wides are probably superfluous, though as from the MLP, the Atmos/X demo material images more or less in the same position anyway. It might matter for seats sitting off-axis, though. If the room were 24x12 instead, the wides would probably be more useful and I probably would only need 4 overhead channels to get good coverage. If the room were 24x24, I'd probably need both to get good even coverage (possibly more). More truly separate speakers probably helps, but helps more in larger rooms, especially with multiple rows of seating (front to back speakers) and more than 1-3 seats across (extra width speakers).
mp5475 likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1634 of 1968 Old 10-02-2018, 04:07 PM
Senior Member
 
mp5475's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
If you play an in-phase (meaning in common information from both channels that are aligned) signal from your left and right speakers using something like a stereo demo disc, what do you get? You get an image that is in the middle (center channel). This is how Pro Logic derives a center channel to send to the center speaker from a 2-channel signal. It extracts the in-phase information they have in common and removes it from the left/right signals and then you send it to a center channel speaker. If you just play the same signal in stereo without a center channel speaker, it images between them with what is called a "phantom image". That image is the information that is identical in the left and right channels. It images between them evenly.

Now if you have a signal that is supposed to go to your front wide channels (let's say the left front wide channel specifically) playing on one receiver and the second receiver is sending that SAME information to the MAIN channels instead (because it thinks you have no front wides and it doesn't want to throw sounds out or they'd be missing entirely), what you have is the same situation except the in-phase information in common is in the left front wide and the main left channel. So, that information phantom images the same as the stereo image would do, in the center point in-between the two. That is where you hear it. Thus, instead of the sound coming from the left front wide speaker, it will sound like it's coming from a point in-between the left front wide and the left main speaker. The net effect is that your front "wides" probably aren't as wide anymore as they would be if ONLY the front wides were playing.

That's not the full story, however because the information that would go to the front wides is folded into the front mains without them and this information is actually out of phase with the right channel (out of phase information tends to image outside the speakers instead of in-between them, although it may sound more "nebulous" depending on the speaker, etc.) when it's just the mains and thus it ends up imaging outside the main speaker anyway and MIGHT even end up in the same exact point where the physical speaker would go in a 7-channel setup (it depends on the speakers how well they image out of phase an whether you're sitting right in-between them at the MLP or not). This is one of the reasons why front wides aren't considered terribly important in the home environment as most home theaters aren't large enough to "need" front wides.

If you have a really large/wide room or multiple seats across, they could make a substantial improvement, but by duplicating the signals with the fronts, they're going to be less wide than if they were completely separate. You could possibly compensate for this (IF your room is wide enough) by moving the front wides further apart than normal so the phantom image ends up where you would have placed the front wides had they been fully separate.

I have a 12x24 room. I need 6 overheads to cover the length of the room or the imaging falls apart (angles are too far apart). The front wides are probably superfluous, though as from the MLP, the Atmos/X demo material images more or less in the same position anyway. It might matter for seats sitting off-axis, though. If the room were 24x12 instead, the wides would probably be more useful and I probably would only need 4 overhead channels to get good coverage. If the room were 24x24, I'd probably need both to get good even coverage (possibly more). More truly separate speakers probably helps, but helps more in larger rooms, especially with multiple rows of seating (front to back speakers) and more than 1-3 seats across (extra width speakers).
Thanks for taking time to explain. I have better understanding. I will go for the middle top.

Thanks again
mp5475 is offline  
post #1635 of 1968 Old 10-04-2018, 08:51 AM
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
I guess I will try both.

Just have hard time understanding why using wides from 6200 will narrow the sound stage, just because you get phantom imaging. The sounds cancel each other? But obviously I am very novice at this stuff.

thanks you for the input.
sell 6200 and get two cheaper avs do Scatmos
michael1997 is offline  
post #1636 of 1968 Old 10-04-2018, 02:28 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael1997 View Post
sell 6200 and get two cheaper avs do Scatmos
Unless Audyssey makes THAT much of a difference in his room (I'm not sold on it, at least on automatic mode; if I get a newer AVR, I'll try the app that lets you limit bandwidth and adjust curves, etc.), I'd just use the configuration with the 8500 as the overheads. That will do it all without spending another dime.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1637 of 1968 Old 10-09-2018, 10:58 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
VideoGrabber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: SW Michigan
Posts: 3,053
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 522 Post(s)
Liked: 324
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
9.1.6 Setup Operational (Marantz SR7010 + Yamaha 5960 + Active Mixer Matrixed Front Wides and Dialog Lift + 2 Onkyo ESPro-600 Pro Logic Top Middle Extraction)

...

I still need to do more wire molding/hiding, etc. as well plus some front side drapes. Still waiting on the new furniture for that matter....

The circuit is now complete. When I left you, I was but the learner. Now I am the master. --Darth Vader

"circle".
VideoGrabber is offline  
post #1638 of 1968 Old 10-10-2018, 09:32 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Damn, I thought with that suit and Anakin's racing history it was circuit. I guess that's what I get for not using subtitles all these years. 😄
vn800art likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1639 of 1968 Old 10-26-2018, 09:44 AM
Senior Member
 
ja00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 224 Post(s)
Liked: 149
Hi Guys. I am currently wiring my setup and would like to clarify. Does matrixing simply mean adding signals together and boosting it to emphasize the common content? So for example, for wides, should I do front + surround = wide (+6db)?



Aside from PL2 extraction, is there a way to remove non-common content?



Thanks.
ja00 is offline  
post #1640 of 1968 Old 10-26-2018, 11:56 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by ja00 View Post
Hi Guys. I am currently wiring my setup and would like to clarify. Does matrixing simply mean adding signals together and boosting it to emphasize the common content? So for example, for wides, should I do front + surround = wide (+6db)?

Aside from PL2 extraction, is there a way to remove non-common content?.
Why would you boost the levels? That creates an unnatural effect. If anything, they should be reduced 3dB as the combination of signals will boost the common signal by that amount.

Aside from PLII, there's PLI. That's what I use. For center extraction, there's very little difference unless you like to play with center width for which some PLII receivers have an adjustment. PLI is much cheaper to buy used. The Onkyo units I use even provide their own amplification (no extra amp needed).

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1641 of 1968 Old 10-26-2018, 12:03 PM
Senior Member
 
ja00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 473
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 224 Post(s)
Liked: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
Why would you boost the levels? That creates an unnatural effect. If anything, they should be reduced 3dB as the combination of signals will boost the common signal by that amount.

Aside from PLII, there's PLI. That's what I use. For center extraction, there's very little difference unless you like to play with center width for which some PLII receivers have an adjustment. PLI is much cheaper to buy used. The Onkyo units I use even provide their own amplification (no extra amp needed).

Oh you're right. My bad.

Unfortunately I do not have the space for more receivers but I do have several DSP channels I can use. Is there a way to mimic (as close as possible) center extraction with DSP? Or is matrixing the only way?

Last edited by ja00; 10-26-2018 at 12:07 PM.
ja00 is offline  
post #1642 of 1968 Old 10-30-2018, 12:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
My new Marantz SR7012 is now installed and working (just watched Jurassic Park Fallen Kingdom 3D in DTS: X). The Onkyo units work fine for Top Middle extraction. I thought Jurassic Park lacked some ambient use of the rear surrounds at times, but there was plenty of rear/front panning, IMO (I tried sitting in the front, middle and back of the room at varying points during the movie; they all sounded good, but it was much easier to gage the specific rear speaker use from the middle and back than the front and vice versa due to the distances involved 24 foot long room).

I've also ordered my new front row chairs (went with two cushy recliners; so it will have 5 recliners plus an extra chair or two I can move in if needed). Meanwhile, I've started some movie poster decorating in the rear of the room....
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MoviePosters.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	1.74 MB
ID:	2475544  
vn800art likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1643 of 1968 Old 11-03-2018, 03:52 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp5475 View Post
I thought about doing this ,but seems to be a waste to use 8500 just for heights. Also I will not be able to use Audyssey app. And I think 8500 would just be better receiver to drive the rest of speakers.
Your receivers (Denon 6200? and 8500?) are rated at 140wpc and 150wpc respectively into 8 ohms, and somewhat higher into 6 ohms. Neither are rated for 4 ohms or all channels driven, so I don't think there will be any noticeable difference when using one or the other to drive the ceiling or the floor speakers, based on amplifier performance anyway. I would focus on the signal processing instead.

I don't see any reason why you would want to use the 8500 for the floor level channels if it is the only receiver you have that can natively decode 6 ceiling speakers in your 9.2.6.

Decoding only top middles from the 8500 top channels, while also decoding top front and top rear from the 6200, adds a front-rear mono mix directly overhead that reduces the front-rear channel separation at the ceiling down from approximately infinity to approximately 3dB.

3dB of channel separation is barely audible and will dramatically reduce the front-rear surround effect. Prepare to be underwhelmed unless your main goal is just to fill in a big center gap in the ceiling sound stage because your room is very long.

Does the 6200 also support that Audyssey app? If not, you maybe are stuck with canned EQ targets for the top front and top rear speakers too, whereas the top middles might be EQd to a custom -1dB/octave and/or only in the modal frequency region. That EQ mismatch might further confuse the channel separation and phantom imaging. You could partially address this with manual EQ on the 6200 but you would need to take some manual measurements to ensure you hit your target.

Personally, if I really wanted to use that Audyssey app, I wouldn't even bother connecting the 6200 at all, and just use a 9.2.4 configuration. Either that or I would just use 7.2.6. Why complicate things if the result isn't even accurate and the channel separation is reduced from infinity to only 3dB?

You have another choice available though, and that is to use your manual 9 band EQ in the stereo-independent (not l-r ganged) mode on all 9.2.6 natively decoded channels, at a cost of lots of manual measurements and some temporary rewiring.

I don't know if you can use any of the subEQ function with manual EQ, but I suspect that you will still have at least independent subwoofer distance calibration. If not, you could maybe split it up as one sub per receiver.

This manual EQ could be particularly trying for a novice doing 16 channels with REW and no discrete multichannel inputs or convenient sound formats that let you directly select each speaker independently for calibration.

You have to temporarily rewire each non-7.1 channel 'object-oriented' speaker to a discretely PCM addressable 7.1 channel output, in order to measure and adjust in cooperation with the subwoofer, while remembering to temporarily adjust the delay and crossover too, and then copy your desired EQ back to the original speaker channel when the temporarily rewired measurement is complete.


I have done that temporary rewiring approach with 11 channels and fortunately I used a full set of banana plugs rather than bare wire in my REW learning curve.

I think you should pick one or the other configuration that I proposed (9.2.4/7.2.6 with auto EQ on the 8500 alone, or 9.2.6 with manual EQ and the 8500 driving the ceiling channels) rather than basing your implementation decision on a desire to use both receivers with Audyssey simply because you already own them both, and just living with the erroneous decoding to spare yourself the effort of doing it right. It's a lot of money and a lot of work just to do it wrong and experience worse surround performance than not using that second receiver at all.

The loss of front-rear channel separation in the ceiling image might be particularly noteworthy if, like me, you are already experiencing significant treble loss in your hearing.

Rattling arthritic earbone distortion seems to have caused me not only some frequency-shifted spurious tones at high volume (nearby ambulance siren sounds like both falling and rising tones simultaneously), but also seems to have caused me brick wall loss in the top octave from the extreme high frequency harmonic energy of that distortion frying the shortest nerve/hair transducer fibers of my inner ear. It's a little bit like cranking the volume control up to full clipping and burning out delicate tweeters with the high frequency energy of those squared-off waves.

The distortion and loss of high frequency information (combined with the tinnitus) means that for me, the directional cue that the high frequency filtering of the pinnea generates is nearly completely lost on my fried ears. That drastically compromises my perception of directional sound, and is one reason why I went with a surround sound system in the first place since I was increasingly unable to get a satisfactory surround sound perception off just two channels and room reflections with so much treble attenuation and distortion and tinnitus.

Since perceived front-to-rear channel separation has no left ear vs. right ear phase component, and instead depends entirely on the frequency response filtering of the pinnea and HRTF as the only directional cue, it is increasingly difficult for me to localize sounds from front to rear as I age, even in a long narrow listening room like I am using currently.

I think I would think carefully before installing a second receiver merely to extract mono top middles that wash out the front to rear separation at the ceiling. I think it would be better to just omit the middles completely, particularly for an older person that might already be experiencing problems localizing sound front-to-rear because of treble loss and its effect of nullifying the pinnea filtering that is the only perceptual cue for channel separation in the front-rear dimension.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #1644 of 1968 Old 11-03-2018, 04:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnumX View Post
...


Edit: I should say there is one other advantage currently to NOT using the 8500H for 6-channel overhead and using the "compromised" setup instead with duplicate Top Middle and that is DTS can't function with more than 11-channels currently on the 8500 and thus you would get ZERO output from the top middle speakers in that configuration. Only Atmos would function. With the compromised setup, you would at least get output from all channels, even if some phantom duplicates. Now whether this upcoming "Imax Enhanced" firmware update breaks the 11-channel limit for DTS, we'll have to see....
This seems similar to Atmos folding the object-oriented wides into the fronts instead of interpolating between fronts and side surrounds when playing back on a system that is limited to 7 floor-level 'bed' channels, or not driving the wides at all in upmix mode on systems with wides.

I seem to recall from earlier in this thread (and also from glancing at the 8500 spec) that there is an Auro 3D upmix issue? where speakers in the top positions/decoding are not driven, but speakers in the height positions/decoding are driven?

Some sound modes from competing manufacturers are going to have incompatibilities with some channel allocations. IMO, just pick the sound mode that delivers the best rendition for the content and be happy.

It's not so simple when deciding which channels (top or height) to install speakers for however.

My experience with height speakers in DTS Neo:x 11.1 channel synthesis playback is that cramming speakers into the corner between front wall and ceiling makes them sound like they have cupped hands around them. This effect seems especially problematic when the channels are also extracted from ambient decorrellated content with no clear imaging of their own. They only seem to contribute confusion.

For the majority of playback that will probably be upmixed from older programming, I suspect that synthesized height channels tucked into the corners near a relatively low 8' ceiling like mine add little that is pleasurable to the listening experience. I didn't particularly care for it, so much so that I have not even bothered to reinstall my height speakers of my Neo:x 11.1 now that I have moved from my apartment back into my house.

Another possibility is if the ceiling is so high that 'height' speakers are mounted nowhere near the ceiling, and the reflection off the ceiling from those speakers is deeply attenuated by the distance so that it doesn't disturb the frequency response so much having a near reflection off just the wall. In that case, height speakers probably sound fine. I wouldn't know from personal experience because I don't have a cathedral ceiling.

So for example, in my long narrow room where I have a substantial span from front to rear, I (tentatively) plan on top speakers instead of height speakers so that I get some decent top-bottom separation in front and rear, without the blatant combing and lobing from the loud ceiling reflection combined with the loud wall reflection in the front and rear corner mounting of the height locations.


Regarding the 11-channel DTS 'limit' that prevents playing six ceiling channels, does that limit also specifically apply to something like a 2.1.6 channel allocation? i.e. Is there currently a maximum of 4 ceiling channels in DTS encoding, or is the channel limitation only on the DTS decoding in these particular receivers that might be upgraded with new firmware some day? I wasn't able to find any relevant information with some quick search engine queries.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #1645 of 1968 Old 11-03-2018, 04:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
CherylJosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,504
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 798 Post(s)
Liked: 323
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael1997 View Post
sell 6200 and get two cheaper avs do Scatmos
I'm not sure at all that this is the best course of action for this person. For one thing, it might be necessary to disable Audyssey on all channels in order to do successful interpolation between top front and top rear because the center extraction of ProLogic depends on being able to distinguish in-phase and out-of-phase information between channels that are level-matched, time-aligned, identically crossed over to the sub, and EQ-flat at the electronic signal level.

If this person really wants to use Audyssey automated room EQ, Scatmos of six ceiling channels via ProLogic is a problem unless Audyssey can be disabled on a channel-by-channel basis for the four ceiling channels of the 8500 only. I doubt that selectively disabling Audyssey is even possible for any but the front l/r speakers because that's the only such case I have ever seen referenced anywhere.

Also, if the output power is problematic for the ceiling channels (that may be smaller and less efficient speakers than those on the floor level), it might be unsatisfactory to drive them with a cheap old prologic receiver at 75WPC even without regard for the distance, EQ, and level match issues of Scatmos. Remember, the plan is to drive all six ceiling speakers with ProLogic decoding off those two additional receivers, not just the top middles that are close to the MLP.

At the very least, that pair of old ProLogic receivers need to have comparable output power so they can keep up with the floor channels. Also, we are back to doing manual EQ at least on the 8500 with this ProLogic Scatmos, so I think I would just keep the 6200 and use that one for the floor level speakers instead of the 8500 that is better suited to the ceiling anyway. It's a simpler and more efficient solution plus it is also an accurate decoding that he already has all the gear he needs to complete should he take the plunge and invest in an 8500.
CherylJosie is offline  
post #1646 of 1968 Old 11-03-2018, 06:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by CherylJosie View Post
I seem to recall from earlier in this thread (and also from glancing at the 8500 spec) that there is an Auro 3D upmix issue? where speakers in the top positions/decoding are not driven, but speakers in the height positions/decoding are driven?
Top positions are totally unsupported with Auro-3D. If you intend to use those locations, you will either have to keep a separate stored setting (say on a USB stick, especially with Audyssey settings for them) to "cheat" the system to do without ANY Auro-3D support what-so-ever.

Quote:
Some sound modes from competing manufacturers are going to have incompatibilities with some channel allocations. IMO, just pick the sound mode that delivers the best rendition for the content and be happy.
That doesn't make me happy at all. Besides, to come to any kind of conclusion you'd have to compare the formats first. DTS/Atmos aren't mutually exclusive. Auro-3D is harder to integrate, but it can be done. DTS will happily work with either configuration, although some would say the Atmos configuration is closer to the DTS mixing studio setup. Personally, listening to Jurassic Park Fallen Kingdom with front/rear height + extracted middle, I thought the ceiling effects lined up perfectly fine with what I was seeing on-screen so I have this lingering doubt about how important it is to match the mixing setup. Off-screen sound effects generally can't be verified as to the "correct" location of a sound and frankly, how much does it really matter if the bird flying across the top of the room from front to back is 3 feet back into the room at moment "A" or 5 feet? I'd find what is closer to the screen more important, personally.

The problem with "Top" ceiling speakers is they are really nowhere NEAR the screen so any effects that should be at the top of the screen are going to be either some combination of the bottom + top phantom imaged diagonally into real space or they're going to be floating well in front of the screen. There is no such thing as "top screen" effects with "top" speakers. Front height, OTOH are supposed to be at the top of the screen. These are separate rendered locations in Atmos. With a Trinnov, you can actually have BOTH without overlap (it IS a coordinate system for objects, after all).

Quote:
It's not so simple when deciding which channels (top or height) to install speakers for however.
It's not simple at all and complicated by whether or not you can or want to install speakers either in or on your ceiling. One doesn't preclude the other, however. You CAN put in-ceiling speakers at the top of the screen (particularly those with aimed tweeter/midranges) and here they could sit more or less right in line with the screen and not interfere directly. Similarly, you CAN put them on or in the ceiling in a height location in the back of the room (e.g. my rear height speakers are mounted on the ceiling in the back of the room). "Height" doesn't have to mean on the front or rear "wall". It's just an angle. There's also a very clear difference, IMO between front height + top middle + rear height and just front height + rear height. Some think they get "more" "overhead" sounds with the 'top' location than the 'height' location even if the speakers are located in the height positions physically. Personally, I find that once "top middle" is used, the differences between the two aren't as great (i.e. it can image anywhere in-between so you're not really limited as the middle speakers will fill in the sounds one way or another by imaging between the two). Frankly, at least with Atmos trailer material, I didn't hear that much difference between the two settings even when using front height + top middle versus top front + top middle in settings (e.g. the Atmos helicopter demo still flew around them in a square/rectangle regardless). Movies may be a difference story. Many of them use top middle more than anything else so if it's missing you're dependent on phantom imaging between the front/rear and that may be part of the issue in some setups. Trailers tend to do a lot more front/rear panning.

Quote:
My experience with height speakers in DTS Neo:x 11.1 channel synthesis playback is that cramming speakers into the corner between front wall and ceiling makes them sound like they have cupped hands around them.
My question is why were you cramming height speakers in the "corner" ??? Height speakers and top speakers are still in line with each other and generally speaking are more or less in line with the front left/right speakers. In my room, the heights are generally nowhere NEAR the "corners" of the room (one back rear corner is closer due to a half bathroom wall sticking out into the room but it's still not in the corner). A "front height" speaker is supposed to be 30-45 degrees and a "top front" speaker 45-60 degrees. There is no rule that says the front height has to be on the wall or right at the ceiling. It could be two or three feet in front of the screen depending on the room. It might be lower than 30 degrees if the room only permits that (supposedly compromised, but mine at are at 20 degrees from the MLP, but because I have extracted "top middle" overheads, it pans perfectly smoothly across the ceiling anyway (i.e. the angles were designed with 2-4 overhead speakers in mind, IMO; I would personally want sounds to match with the screen more than fit some supposedly "magic number". You lose a little separation, perhaps, but if it matches the top/bottom of the screen, where's the harm? Ceiling speakers weren't really an option in the front of the room (bookcases built into the walls would have looked "bad" with speakers sitting dropped down in front of them; my projection screen actually drops between the two bookcases).

Quote:
This effect seems especially problematic when the channels are also extracted from ambient decorrellated content with no clear imaging of their own. They only seem to contribute confusion.
I have no clue WTF you're talking about. What confusion? Decorrelated material is typically supposed to sound hard to localize or "all around" What does the height location have to do with that? The length of the room relative to the number of overhead speakers can cause problems (e.g. my room is 24 feet long; using just TWO overheads means either the back (using front + middle) or the middle of the room (front height + rear height) is going to be missing coverage due to the massive panning angles. Using 6 overheads eliminates this problem and things like "rain" sound like they're coming from overhead everywhere in the room front to back regardless of where you sit.

Quote:
For the majority of playback that will probably be upmixed from older programming, I suspect that synthesized height channels tucked into the corners near a relatively low 8' ceiling like mine add little that is pleasurable to the listening experience. I didn't particularly care for it, so much so that I have not even bothered to reinstall my height speakers of my Neo:x 11.1 now that I have moved from my apartment back into my house.
Again, I have NO IDEA why you're putting overhead speakers in the room CORNERS. Even my old Yamaha "presence" speaker diagram had them 2/3 up the wall on either side of the screen, but nowhere near the side walls or "corners".

Quote:
Another possibility is if the ceiling is so high that 'height' speakers are mounted nowhere near the ceiling, and the reflection off the ceiling from those speakers is deeply attenuated by the distance so that it doesn't disturb the frequency response so much having a near reflection off just the wall. In that case, height speakers probably sound fine. I wouldn't know from personal experience because I don't have a cathedral ceiling.
I don't know why you'd assume that. You can treat a room or use room correction to help eliminate room reflections. Assuming you keep your height speakers away from the corners, that only leaves the ceiling in question. Angling downward can help; room correction can help; you could treat the ceiling even if you're really worried about it. Ceiling speakers don't guarantee good coverage either. The design of the speaker and whether it can angle the midrange and/or tweeters is important for a ceiling Atmos speaker (unless it has REALLY good off-axis response).

Quote:
So for example, in my long narrow room where I have a substantial span from front to rear, I (tentatively) plan on top speakers instead of height speakers so that I get some decent top-bottom separation in front and rear, without the blatant combing and lobing from the loud ceiling reflection combined with the loud wall reflection in the front and rear corner mounting of the height locations.
Again, you keep bringing up "corner" mounting. WTF would you put them in the corners? Loud ceiling reflection? I guess I missed that since they sound quite clear here (i.e. I did a lot of experiments early on redirecting 2-channel and such to just the height speakers to compare the sound to the lower speakers).

Quote:
Regarding the 11-channel DTS 'limit' that prevents playing six ceiling channels, does that limit also specifically apply to something like a 2.1.6 channel allocation? i.e. Is there currently a maximum of 4 ceiling channels in DTS encoding, or is the channel limitation only on the DTS decoding in these particular receivers that might be upgraded with new firmware some day? I wasn't able to find any relevant information with some quick search engine queries.
2.1.6? I don't believe you can configure such a layout for ANY of the modes on the 8500H. I think you could assign a 7.1.6 layout that would function as 5.1.6 (where the .6 is Center Height and Top Surround added to front/rear height as in an Auro 13.1 layout). I believe someone just confirmed that worked in the Denon 8500H thread (center height and top surround + front/rear height). IF the software allowed a 5.1.6 with top middle, it SHOULD work from a DTS perspective (i.e. DTS has an 11-channel limit; it allows any combination within that limit generally speaking. 9.1.2 works. 7.1.4 works. 5.1.6 (with CH/TS) works AFAIK.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CherylJosie View Post
I'm not sure at all that this is the best course of action for this person. For one thing, it might be necessary to disable Audyssey on all channels in order to do successful interpolation between top front and top rear because the center extraction of ProLogic depends on being able to distinguish in-phase and out-of-phase information between channels that are level-matched, time-aligned, identically crossed over to the sub, and EQ-flat at the electronic signal level.

If this person really wants to use Audyssey automated room EQ, Scatmos of six ceiling channels via ProLogic is a problem unless Audyssey can be disabled on a channel-by-channel basis for the four ceiling channels of the 8500 only. I doubt that selectively disabling Audyssey is even possible for any but the front l/r speakers because that's the only such case I have ever seen referenced anywhere.
I don't know what frequency response correction has to do with PHASE extraction.... (this isn't DIRAC). I think Audyssey would work just fine. To get every individual speaker done, though you'd need the additional receivers doing Scatmos to have Audyssey as well, at least to do individual response for each speaker. You could combine YPAO or even do without on the ceiling speakers. It's all a big subjective. I honestly think it's kind of weird how much 2-channel audiophiles tend to HATE any form of EQ or room correction (not all obviously) while theater types can't seem to imagine functioning without it. With some judicious room treatments, a home theater can sound great without any room correction applied from the AVR. In fact, without an editor (like the iOS/Android app), you're pretty limited in what it does to your room (some hated without any bandwidth limiting) etc. and older models like my previous 7010 were either only automatic or required a professional kit to adjust them (big money).

Quote:
Also, if the output power is problematic for the ceiling channels (that may be smaller and less efficient speakers than those on the floor level), it might be unsatisfactory to drive them with a cheap old prologic receiver at 75WPC even without regard for the distance, EQ, and level match issues of Scatmos. Remember, the plan is to drive all six ceiling speakers with ProLogic decoding off those two additional receivers, not just the top middles that are close to the MLP.
I call BS here simply because you'd be LUCKY to get 75W out of a ANY receiver out there with ALL channels running (i.e. The 8500H has a 900W power supply. Driving all channels to 150 watts would require nearly 2000W of continuous power (and that power supply has to power the preamp, decoders, video, etc. as well so it's not even going to have 900W available. The output caps might give you a small instantaneous power boost, but it won't last long. My pro logic decoders have 50W each for top middle. I haven't come anywhere near clipping at LOUD volumes (speakers 90dB/[email protected]; 32 watts reaches 105dB (That's Dolby's reference PEAK volume!) at that ONE speaker for goodness sake and that unit only powers ONE speaker so it gets it ALL; I doubt ANY Atmos program pushes 105dB out of ONE top middle overhead speaker at Dolby reference levels. It would literally be operating by itself at full theater volume all by its lonesome and that's CONTINUOUS power, not peak).

Quote:
At the very least, that pair of old ProLogic receivers need to have comparable output power so they can keep up with the floor channels.
It doesn't take as much as you apparently THINK it does. 60 Watts TOTAL can bring 15 90dB rated speakers to 105dB when played in unison, for example. 150 watts is useful for bringing STEREO speakers to 100+ dB levels, but not 15 speakers as it takes the SAME TOTAL amount of power to reach 105dB with TWO speakers as it does with 10 speakers or 15 speakers! In other words, that power is divided among more drivers instead. 10 speakers at 10 watts each (with same efficiency) produces the same output level as one speaker at 100W. Thus, to reach "reference" volumes, you need enough power to drive a single speaker to 105dB. A 90dB speaker needs only 32W. 10 speakers would only need 3.2 watts each (assuming they're all playing the same thing, etc.) to reach the same level as one speaker at 32W.

Thus, you don't NEED 150W for all 11 or 13 speakers. 50-60 Watts is more than plenty unless you have some truly low efficient speakers. However, real world speakers are not typically purely resistive loads and many amps have trouble driving more reactive speakers, which is probably why some people think they need really large amps for some speakers. There are inefficient speakers out there as well (every 3dB drop in rating needs 2x as much power to drive to the same level). You could probably drive a Klipsch based home theater with 98dB rated speakers to 121dB with all of 200 watts total (ouch on the ears).

My Carver speakers by comparison rated at 87dB need quite a lot of power to reach 115dB (nearly 350W) with pink noise, but only 35W to reach 105dB. Sub levels are 115 peak with Dolby and so I have 350W amps on the bass drivers alone (gives it an equivalent 90dB rating or peaks at 118dB headroom. I've never clipped the bass amp, but I have tripped the safety on ribbon amp near those levels before, but that amp is only rate to 150W).

Quote:
Also, we are back to doing manual EQ at least on the 8500 with this ProLogic Scatmos, so I think I would just keep the 6200 and use that one for the floor level speakers instead of the 8500 that is better suited to the ceiling anyway. It's a simpler and more efficient solution plus it is also an accurate decoding that he already has all the gear he needs to complete should he take the plunge and invest in an 8500.
And you will get ZERO content for top middle with DTS that way due to the 11-channel limit (you don't get to choose priority for 7.1.6 for DTS and it won't let you do less than 7.1.6 to get the 0.6 even if you're combining receivers). "Accurate" decoding in a misnomer. My extracted top middle passes the Dolby Atmos .6 test just fine (in other words, top middle IS the in-phase information between the two channels regardless whether it's moved by channel extraction or coordinates. The results are the same).

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1647 of 1968 Old 11-03-2018, 08:26 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
I did more testing with 9.1.6 and I have to say I like the sound in the back of the room (3rd row)... The surround is just wild back there the way it stretches the full 24 feet in front of me and just behind me, like some vortex of sound!

The 92" screen looks about like a 72" screen from back there, IMO with the second row looking more like 82". With two more rows of seating in front of me, it definitely feels like I'm sitting in an actual little movie theater instead of just a family room. I've got new furniture on order to replace the front row (currently a couch) with rocking recliners (I have leather powered lift chairs in 2nd/3rd rows that can move up to see over the other two rows heads if needed). Meanwhile, my last poster (BTTF) arrives tomorrow (back of the room decorated with movie posters).

I'm looking to add star lighting next for the ceiling (kind of an outdoor look underground) plus dark side wall curtains in the front to absorb sound and block the side walls. I just put together a star projector. I'm not sure it looks real enough since there's no focusing mechanism and there's some constellations outlined, but I can choose from like 8 different colors of "stars", but it gives the room a very dim light glow without intruding on the screen so you don't trip over yourself while the movie is running on a dark scene if you need to get up and use the bathroom or visit the refreshment stand in the room behind the theater (I need to add a rotating hot dog machine and popcorn maker next!) My RF remote can control 5 AC devices (set to turn on Dolby units, subwoofer, two lamps and the ceiling 'star' projector currently).

For whatever reason, the bass is fantastic now in the back of the room compared to the 7010 (without Audyssey even). I'm doubting I'm going to need a second subwoofer at this point (using rear X1T surrounds with bass set to 40Hz so maybe that's helping? Whatever it is, it's go crazy bass front to back now). I haven't even tried Audyssey yet (I did buy the $20 iOS App to manually set the curves, though).
vn800art likes this.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
post #1648 of 1968 Old 11-11-2018, 08:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
I just found a nice priced 2-channel amp (SMSL SA50 50Wx2) I'm thinking of getting along with another active mixer to add a set of speakers between the side surrounds and rear surrounds. I think imaging would flow smoother with hard speakers in those locations. I can either buy another set of PSB B15s or wait until I can find two more used PSB T45s (in black; eBay has a set right now but they're painted black with the light colored grills) and then move my current B15s in L/R over (Otherwise I have to get another stand as well).

This would bring the system to 11.1.6, which should cut every angle on the floor down to 30 degrees or less between speakers for optimal imaging with about 60 degrees between overheads (front, middle, back). I'm still debating on whether to bother with the VOG speaker or possibly add two ceiling speakers with switch to change between side height and ceiling hight and then send a parallel dual-mono to them for VOG on the switch for Auro-3D. I'm also looking at room treatments for the front side walls and possibly some bass traps for the back corners. I'm trying to decide between acoustic tiles or drapes on the front sides. Both have some advantages/disadvantages. I like the movie posters I've been adding. I wouldn't mind some in the front of the room on the sides, after all. But I'm thinking to combine with a room treatment (it would have to acoustic tile/frame, I'd have to get a fabric based poster (silk for example) so the poster doesn't interfere too much with the tile.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	MoviePosters.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	1.74 MB
ID:	2480994   Click image for larger version

Name:	SideWall.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	1.91 MB
ID:	2480996   Click image for larger version

Name:	FrontViewAtmos1.jpg
Views:	35
Size:	336.9 KB
ID:	2480998  

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)

Last edited by MagnumX; 11-11-2018 at 08:58 AM.
MagnumX is offline  
post #1649 of 1968 Old 11-12-2018, 02:13 AM
Senior Member
 
BRAISKI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CANADA
Posts: 440
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked: 13
This is a great thread! How come I just saw this now!


Always wanted to have 12 or 14 but realistically speaking AVR that's capable of those are very expensive.



Currently in Germany with the gf, and she has a Denon X2000, so like some of us here, its not "enough". Hopefully next year I can get the X4300/X4300 used or if I find a good deal with the X6400 used.


The cool thing now with this thread is that once I get new AVR, the X2000 can still be useful! I just need to read more and educate myself with this type of setup!

Denon 2809CI
C: Def Tech - CLR2002
F: Def Tech - BP2002TL
S: Def Tech - BP1.2X
SB: Def Tech - PM400
Sub: Plan to get the SVS-SB1000
BRAISKI is offline  
post #1650 of 1968 Old 11-19-2018, 04:27 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
MagnumX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,809
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1049 Post(s)
Liked: 571
I've discovered that setting the ceiling/height speakers to +1.0dB (using a Radio Shack SPL meter) above the bed layer MASSIVELY increases the overall "3D" effect. Ceiling sounds are much more noticeable and blend seamlessly at levels in-between layers now. The Atmos "Rainstorm" demo is eerie now with rain sounding like it's right in front of my face instead of just overhead. It's unbelievable how much difference one little decibel made here. I set it one dB up in all height channels (front, middle and rear). YMMV, of course.

Click THEATER (Updated: May-22-2019) for pics: Epson 3100 3D Projector, DaLite 92" screen, 11.1.6 (Marantz SR7012 + Yamaha HTR-5960 + Onkyo ESPro) - Dialog Lift - PSB T45/B15/S50/X1T/CS500 Speakers & Def Tech PF-1500 15" sub; 2nd Room (Updated Apr-22-2019): 48" Plasma TV, Carver AL-III, Carver C-5 Pre-Amp, Technics SH-AC500D, Dual Carver TFM-35x Amps (Active Bi-Amp), Klipsch Surrounds ; Sources: PS4, LG UP875 UHD, Nvidia Shield (KODI), ATV4K, Zidoo X9S, LD, GameCube : Props (Updated 7-5-19)
MagnumX is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off