Originally Posted by Soulburner
Taking all of this into consideration, thanks.
I can not duplicate my surround speakers for surround heights due to their size and price, but I can find the closest match and place them properly.
Atmos music is interesting but you can only get it on Tidal at the moment, and only with their $20/mo plan.
I think the front heights, ceiling mounted and in-line with Front L and R but a foot or two forward does make logical sense. Maintain about the same distance to the seats for each. Surround heights directly above the surrounds is the same idea of speakers in-line with each other. I have to believe that should produce a good Atmos effect in a small room.
Well, this all makes me think I need to rethink some things. I had seen the document from the second link in your original post but I don't think I realized how important it is to have the heights directly above the mains or corresponding surrounds. Perhaps it's in the text and I missed it. I was also going by the speaker setup recommendations in the Monolith HTP-1 user guide rather than the Denon one you linked since it accounts for a full 16 channels. There is information in the Auro-3D thread that you have also posted in stressing this importance. I have almost zero interest in Auro for theater use since there is so little content available and it appears to be waning rapidly, but I have a lot of interest in the Auro-3D upmixer for music and want to get the best possible results I can from it. I'm sure very few folks have their layouts optimized for Auro in this way, which may explain why we don't see the Hosannas for Auro upmixer that we perhaps might, though it does still appear that most people still think quite highly of it, which may in itself be telling.
Here's my dilemma(s). My main L/R will be out in the room quite a bit, about 3 ft from either the front or side walls, and will be toed in. My wall height is 9', with the ceiling sloping upwards (from all 4 walls) before flattening out at 11' (partially to eliminate hard corners at the ceiling). This arrangement makes it hard to have the front top speakers directly overhead (and apparently, slightly ahead) of the main L/R. I had planned to mount the top fronts on the wall up near the ceiling, directly behind and above the main L/R. Really, the only way I can imagine doing it is to use a mount similar to a projector mount in which a "pole" extends from the ceiling that has a really versatile speaker mount (my top surrounds are Kef R100's and I definitely don't want to drill or screw into the cabinets. They're also fairly heavy). I'm also planning to use "wide" channels. Should this mean that perhaps the top fronts would be better if moved a little wider than being directly over the mains? Or are wides even used in upmixed, matrixed Auro 3D? The surround placement will also need to be rethought though they are certainly easier to deal with. My top middles are in-ceiling speakers, which goes along with the HTP-1 guidelines. I'm guessing just moving them further out to the sides more so that they can blend with the side surrounds better is probably the best I can hope for, and they are already the one top surround channel speaker set that are directly above/in-line with the corresponding bed-level speakers. Perhaps I should even consider putting them in the sloped part of the ceiling to further this blending, though this would be less than ideal for Atmos.
I realize that you are here looking for guidance for your own speaker layout, but I have also seen enough of your posts to know that you are well informed and logical in your thinking, so I trust your opinions and/or instincts about the broader subject. So what's your suggestion? Do you think these extra placement hurdles are worth the effort or do you think I would get enough of the magic of Auro 3D by sticking with my current plan? If the Logic 16 upmixer in the JBL SDP-55 turns out to be the holy grail in music upmixing this could all be rendered moot but I'm definitely not holding my breath for that. Early results are less than stellar but I'm sure they're not through refining it's implementation. And apparently the Atmos music upmixer is better now, too, but when I see the Auro upmixer described as "magical" when done properly that makes me think that's the one to pursue if it can be made to work well without a too deleterious affect on the more movie-oriented formats.