AVS Forum banner

1541 - 1560 of 2318 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Does dd+ preserve the channel assignments?
Think of Atmos as being made up of two parts: audio (data) and instructions on where to place the audio (metadata). The instructions part doesn't take up much space, so it can be the same for disc and streaming. But the audio part takes up lots of storage space and transmission bandwidth. So, the size of the soundtrack is shrunk using lossless packing (TrueHD) for disc and lossy compression (DD+) for streaming. But choice of compression codec has nothing to do with the instructions (channel assignments).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
I disagree simply because it would have taken NOTHING on their part to gave a menu option to simply disable overhead redirection, which would then allow you to do 9.1.6 with just two 11-channel receivers at half the cost of a model that can STILL only do 9.1.4 or 7.1.6 at most and can't do more than 7.1.4 or 9.1.2 with DTS. They must want that reserved for the $30k Trinnov and the like.
Well it would have taken a bit of R&D and a ton of time to get Dolby to certify it. After all it took nearly a year for the first DSP based processors to be approved for 9.1.6 duty. Speaking of which, the Emotiva RMC-1 finally has a release date for native 9.1.6 for 5k.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
I'm saying Dolby should have allowed such options from Day 1. There's an argument to be made about putting rear height information in the front channels anyway (5.1.2). I know they don't want to "lose" sounds, but placing them where they don't belong isn't a whole lot better. At least put them in the lower rear speakers instead on a 7.1.2 type system. That alone would let you fudge the two receiver thing by carefully choosing which ones to use (as I was hoping would work above; DTS seems to pick and choose more than Atmos in that regard, although a duplicate is still better than having some other channel activate you can't work around. Why Atmos copies the side surrounds to the wides in a 5.1 + FW configuration...no idea. That's useful as an array for multi-rows, but why you'd want your sides forward for wide info, I don't have a clue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,834 Posts
Yeah, it’s either A:

I don't have a clue.
Or B:

Everyone else very happy with Atmos in everything from 5.1.2 all the way up to 7.1.4 don’t have a clue.

Seems pretty clear to me....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Yeah, it’s either A:

(I'll put the FULL quote here instead your BS cut & paste)

That's useful as an array for multi-rows, but why you'd want your sides forward for wide info, I don't have a clue.

Or B:

Everyone else very happy with Atmos in everything from 5.1.2 all the way up to 7.1.4 don’t have a clue.

Seems pretty clear to me....
Wow. Just wow. Unbelievably rude egotistical behavior from some of the people on here when you don't agree with every word they say.... Absolutely pathetic, IMO. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,834 Posts
Wow. Just wow. Unbelievably rude egotistical behavior from some of the people on here when you don't agree with every word they say.... Absolutely pathetic, IMO. :rolleyes:
Yeah, sorry about that, i could help it the way you ended that post ;)

But listen, you are looking at this way too complicated.
Atmos provided a 3D sound system that would work for everyone. Put one set of speakers above you, and helicopters, rain, thunder etc is suddenly coming from above you. Neven been done before. And it works. As intended.
And the only difference between 2 speakers overhead and the full 10 overhead speakers is better resolution.
Same with ear level speaker: only difference between 5 ear level speakers and the full 24 is better resolution.

Any system has limitations, as does Atmos, but when you try to bypass those limitations, and it doesn’t work as you want it to, it is not the fault of Atmos. Sure, you can say «it should have worked» or «they should have made that possible», but that is simply just your opinion.

There are several of us that has challenged those limitations, and that is why this thread was made, and some tricks work, others don’t.

But you saying 5.1.2 doesn’t work is not true. It works very well, within the limits it has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Yeah, sorry about that, i could help it the way you ended that post ;)
But you saying 5.1.2 doesn’t work is not true. It works very well, within the limits it has.
I'm not saying it doesn't "work." I tried every configuration my 11.2 receiver could do (within the confines of the 4 overhead heights currently installed) so I know how it sounded with the demos, but it didn't sound the way you imply (i.e. that the rear test tones work the same as the front test tones therefore what I suggested above won't "work" the way I'm thinking). What I heard was the spaceship that flew overhead in the "horizon" demo showed up in the front when it appeared toward the front in both cases. But with top middle, I thought it appeared earlier/sooner overhead and then moved to the front height. But with just the front height, it showed up there at the same time, but seemed to stay at the lower sides until then. Thus, I assumed that in practice (not just test tones), it would put "front height" sounds in the front at the correct time and use the lower speakers for the back/middle.

I'm agreeing that the test tones behave as you say, but I can't reconcile what I heard with it, exactly. The overhead "rain" did seem to appear wherever I put the speakers, but then it's overhead in all three anyway so I couldn't make that assumption.

All I was trying to say above that hooking it up the way I described couldn't be any more of an "error" than having rear height information in the front speakers in a 2-channel height configuration. I think it would actually phantom somewhere in-between the locations. Thus, it might not move as "far" back from the MLP, but it would pan across the 6 height speakers. How well? I'd have to try it. I saw another 7010 that had some dents on the top for $599 (otherwise fully functional so it says) and so I thought it might be worth a try at that price, but if it won't work any better than a matrixed or pro-logic steered top middle, there's no point in spending the money. I'm not poor, but I'm not rich either to just blow money for the heck of it.

But yes, 5.1.2 sounds better than 5.1 since it at least does have height separation in general (and the lower speaker movement seems to blend in as well to create the impression of "some" overhead movement where it might not otherwise be. 5.1.4 sounds really good overhead, but in my room, the rears make a huge difference for distance behind me (seeing the rear wall is 12 feet back). Even without the rear heights in place, it still sounded better as 7.1.4 than 5.1.4.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,834 Posts
Well, you’re proposed 6 height setup will work better than a 2 height setup, that’s for sure ;)
My guess is you will like it. Why? Because it puts more content overhead! It won’t work correctly(as in true 9.1.6), but it will pan both left/right and front/rear, and as you say when playing real content instead of test tones, the pros can overweight the cons.

I’ll let you in on a little secret: i actually started my dual AVR journey with such a overhead setup almost 4 years ago, and here is a post about it:

Well, screw DTS:X. Got tired of waiting, so i tried something else.
Frustrated about the 7.1.4 limit of speaker in Atmos?
Don't want the hassle of 8min config loads to get both Atmos/Auro full setups?
Can't afford the overly expensive Trinnov or Datasat?

Well, i found a way to get 9.1.6 native Atmos and 12.1 Auro 3D with 1 setup!

How?
Well, as you know, i have my Denon 5200, connected to 14 speakers, and it is setup with full 10.1 Auro:
5.1+FH+SH+TS(VOG).
Press the movie remote button and the 9.1.2 Atmos is selected:
5.1+FW+SB+FH.
Ok, since i got over a grand for my old Onkyo 3010 receiver, i used the money to buy a second Denon, this time the little brother: 4100.
So, connected some of the 5200's speakers and some new to get it calibrated, this has amp assign as follows:

Amp Assign: 9.1
Height Speakers: 4 height speakers
Height Layout: Top Middle+Rear Height
Pre-out: Front and rear height

The two receivers are connected using a HDMI from the Zone2 HDMI out from the 5200, that send full image and sound, by the way, to one of the HDMI input on the 4100.

I do not have fronts connected to the 4100, but the 4 ceiling seakers make the new native Atmos setup a full 9.1.6 :
5.1+FW+SB+FH(as before from the 5200) +TM+RH(from the 4100).



The 5200:



The 4100:



Movie button again switch to the full 10.1 Auro setup from the 5200 and with a dual source speaker switch for the Surround backs between 5200/4100 , and i gain the SB from the 4100 on the Auro setup= 12.1.

But wait, there's more. The following are connected to the 4100, eq'd and separatly calibrated from the 5200' speakers.
Side Surround B. Since the 4100 have empty surround speaker post, why not use them with a second set surround speakers placed at ca 80 degrees(surround A at 110 degrees).
Center Height. Same here, empty center speakers posts, so connected another center speaker high on the front wall.

And remember the pesky use of sub pre-out 2 for the Top Surround in Auro 10.1 setup?
Well, the 4100 has 2 brand new seperatly calibrated sub pre-outs available!

Actually, with a second dual source speaker switch, i can use the Atmos RH as SBH in Auro, since the SBH is ganged in SH anyway in Auro 15.1 setup.

So, one could say the following:

Atmos: 5.1+SB+S2+FW+FH+TM+RH+CH=11.1.7

Auro 3D:
5.1+SB+S2+FH+SH+SBH+TS+CH= 17.1

It works!! The lip sync is spot on, and espesially the 6 ceiling speakers really woke up the "spaceious" feeling, and i believe the 4100 will be staying :)

A couple of glitches though, but nothing major, ex. two volum buttons etc. but i can live with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vn800art

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
There'a a certain irony there, somehow. I like the castor wheels. That would be a lot easier to move around than dragging across the carpet. :)

I'm going to try the Pro Logic units first + matrixed front wides. I don't think the MLP really needs front wides (those engines in Unbroken phantom imaged to the sides the same only slightly behind the full wides), though in my room plus they're kind of not great looking on the right side of the room and buying another $600 pair to put on the wall instead just for that seems excessive (I did see a nice pair of smaller PSB dipoles where I could simply disconnect the rear firing drivers (since I wouldn't need sound firing to the front of the room, but it would still hang on the wall easy and be out of the way), but they'd be in the way of putting up drapes to cover the white walls in the front and absorb some reverb reflections there. I could put them lower, but that just exacerbates the "not above ear level" issue with the front lower speakers (for rows behind it) as it is. I really need risers to truly fix it (or those chairs that simulate risers) or set two front seats so the gap in the middle is between them and all rows behind would then be line level with the main speakers and center (but no one in the front would get to sit directly center). It's hard to make three rows work in a less than perfect room. But then I have yet to even get three of the chairs from the closeout sale so I can't help but wonder if they took the money and ran (the new place already moved in). Then there's the tensioned electric screen I want to replace the non-tensioned screen with (nice to plug into a 12V trigger), not to mention a 4K (hell by then maybe 8K) projector at some point. It never ends.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,299 Posts
It seems a bit unorthodox to attempt going past 7.1.4 via multiple processors without first living with a single 7.1.4 SSP for a while.
@MagnumX have much time/money have you spent so far? I wonder how much you will have spent vs simply buying a X8500H once your project is complete?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
It seems a bit unorthodox to attempt going past 7.1.4 via multiple processors without first living with a single 7.1.4 SSP for a while.
@MagnumX have much time/money have you spent so far? I wonder how much you will have spent vs simply buying a X8500H once your project is complete?
I don't have a lot of choices due to the room length. Front Height + Rear Height are too low angles and too far away to effectively phantom image, especially for three rows. I already have side bipolars mounted for the old style side surround. They can't go any higher than 85% due to the main beam hanging down above them, so I've left them in place for surround height and after testing, I think they will work just fine for Top Middle as well (the helicopter demo sounded correct to me (might not be a perfect straight line from the front heights, but it's close enough I can't tell)). Again, they're only 2 feet from the Top Middle position so it's pretty darn close sounding. I doubt I need the front wides, but either way, 9.1.4 sounds great, but front height + top middle is missing something behind me with Atmos, but Rear Height + Front Height would have a hole in it without the middle speakers so thus I need SOME kind of middle speaker there to bridge the void.

I can go Matrix or Pro Logic. I've got the two processor for the latter and a mixer for the former so I could go either way as long as I get rid of front wides. With front wides in play, I have to use the Pro Logic units for top middle as they also provide 50 watts for the top middle speakers on top of 3-channel Pro Logic processing and I'm two amp channels short without it (need 3rd receiver then, which is why I chose the Onkyo units as they have their own amps for the center channel).

I don't look at it as something to live with for awhile. I look at it as necessary to get it to sound right across the entire length of the room and three rows of seating. Given it works great top front + top middle and I've been told this "scatmos" thing works fine, I don't see an issue, really with going ahead with it. I've tested mostly demos in the current configurations (tested 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.2, 7.1.4 and 9.1.2 (matrix FW), 9.1.4 (matrix fw)). They all image great (save 2nd/3rd row have all height effects in front of their position; 7.1 ground only sounds great from all locations so why wouldn't 7.1.6 also if scatmos images well in the middle?)

I only paid $783 for the Marantz 7010 ($982 with the $199 Auro3D upgrade). Most of the rest of the expense has come from more speakers (front heights, front wides, rear surrounds and rear heights plus the T45 full tower center I was unable to acquire more units of for L/R so I'm using B15 bookshelf speakers, at least for now that have the same drivers; actually with the front heights doing dialog lift, the combined 'array' of front L/R + Front Height L/R has the same number of woofers as the T45 center for that matter) as I was only 6.1 before. There is also the failed PLII units that didn't work, the 7.1 extractor I tested 7.1 with, active mixers and hundreds of feet of wiring among other things plus new furniture coming, etc. All those things were needed regardless of the main AVR so I'm still $3000 less than buying an 8500H either way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,830 Posts
Atmos isn't channel based, it is using objects. And yes DD+ support the same number of objects as the TrueHD container. The difference is that the audio is compressed just like DD and DTS.
Thanks it’s fine then.

It does does have physical and logical channels though, yes? The physical channels are the actual container tracks and the logical channels can utilize any speakers because they are steered via metadata.

So how many physical audio data channels total can be stored at a time? I heard 16?

I'm saying Dolby should have allowed such options from Day 1. There's an argument to be made about putting rear height information in the front channels anyway (5.1.2). I know they don't want to "lose" sounds, but placing them where they don't belong isn't a whole lot better. At least put them in the lower rear speakers instead on a 7.1.2 type system. That alone would let you fudge the two receiver thing by carefully choosing which ones to use (as I was hoping would work above; DTS seems to pick and choose more than Atmos in that regard, although a duplicate is still better than having some other channel activate you can't work around. Why Atmos copies the side surrounds to the wides in a 5.1 + FW configuration...no idea. That's useful as an array for multi-rows, but why you'd want your sides forward for wide info, I don't have a clue.
I’d say that’s an outdoors setting or a small setup in a very large space. Just a guess. You might want a 5.1 side array because you are basically creating the walls. Don’t want too much surround going on because of all the rows of seating spreading it out too far so give up the rears. I’d think of using it to play back surround music concerts in a home theater. Don’t want weird synthesis artifacts and there’s no object steering going on. Action all up front. Keep it simple. My guess.

If what I just read in the AVR-XH8500H user manual means what I think it does, and what I think I understand from the posts on this thread is true, you can spend $8000 on a pair of them ($6000 used) and get yourself 9.4.8 Atmos channels that are completely independent as long as you split the bass-limited channels by top and bottom.

Only the subwoofer EQ will interact slightly and the way to deal with that is to wire all speakers, as configured in the sound mode of a receiver, to that receiver individually, during calibration to ensure all channels autoconfigure, then apply the channel split after calibration is complete on both systems.

You can even keep the room eq and all other functions. You don’t need any external amplification.

You might have to parallel up sub-bass with a mixer. You can build a mixer for this with three resistors per output channel and not even have to adjust any gain. The gains will automatically match. Just use 5K ohm, or whatever the pre out impedance is rated at. It’s okay, everything impedance-matches well enough.

If you use other sound modes you might also be able to configure 9.4.9 or 9.4.7. I saw a height center channel somewhere in that XH8500 spec.

I’d call that an fffin bargain. Not sure why you aren’t satisfied.

If you want to switch sound modes after calibration to something else from a competitor, you might need to add some speaker switching on the fly and live with some EQ dysfunction on some speakers. You can probably handle that switching at pre out and keep it safe during power on condition with a mute cycle on the power amp if you need to. It’s simple to wire a switch box made from multiplexers with zero contact bounce.

I’m not sure if channels split top and bottom will be completely independent in other modes but it’s probably close if not exact.

If you use manual cal and manual EQ like I do, you can just tweak it on the fly when you rewire. Manual is usually ganged and it works better in a symmetrical room but it’s okay even in a skewed chamber. All you need is a minute and a cheat sheet to re-load the cal.

Apparently you can also link the two receivers so they control simultaneously. At least, there is one receiver out there that will link if not this one. Otherwise, there’s probably a way to configure tandem remote forwarding. You’ll probably want a nice wireless universal remote anyway after this investment.

You can also use two older receivers from many manufacturers (probably including Onkyo and pioneer) to do similar config for a 9.2.6 with two PLII receivers running the tops via channel steering to create top middle. It’s not exactly pure top middle but it’s pretty close. If you have room for four receivers it works. If you only have room for 3 you can use the XH8500 instead of the two older Atmos and do the same steering trick.

If you are really clever maybe you might find an older receiver that has the same 13 channel processing but only 11 amps and use the same PLII steering trick for 9.2.6 without needing external amplification for the otherwise unpowered channels. I think I saw evidence somewhere of such receivers having been sold. I’m currently looking into that option myself as an alternative if it works out to less money than the 8500.

I’d say you have options.

Also, if you can’t get two XH8500s, with one of them you can trade offf front wides versus top middles in a 9.2.6 system by a button push per your preference and expand it later. I’m thinking of skipping the older gear and starting there. I’ve got the speakers. I’m just trying to figure out the placement. I’m not big on re-mounting ceiling speakers. I’m also working on the funding.

So even if the manufacturers didn’t give us the option of splitting the room front to rear and simplifying the wiring around doorways and walkways. they did give us options. Not intentionally perhaps, but we have them anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
You must be made of money if you think dropping $8000 just on AVRs to get 9.1.6 is an "fffin bargain". I might as well just buy the Lyngdorf. :rolleyes: And you'd STILL need another amp to do dialog lift (3 receivers or 2 receivers + 1 stereo amp minimum). That new Emotiva-1 costs less to do it with one.

What I was talking about could be done for ~$1400-1600 used (not $6000) if the receivers simply didn't redirect speakers it THINKS you don't have. I mean if you spend $8000 on AVRs, what's the total theater cost with speakers, projector, screen, furniture, room treatments, etc.? $30K? More? That's an fffin bargain alright. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,834 Posts
There'a a certain irony there, somehow.
Indeed ;)

You want overhead speakers? I got them :)





It seems a bit unorthodox to attempt going past 7.1.4 via multiple processors without first living with a single 7.1.4 SSP for a while.
@MagnumX have much time/money have you spent so far? I wonder how much you will have spent vs simply buying a X8500H once your project is complete?
Kind of agree. 7.1.4 should be plenty for normal people ;)
I at least had 7.1.4 for 3 whole months !! before i went «beyond» ;)

I don't have a lot of choices due to the room length. Front Height + Rear Height are too low angles and too far away to effectively phantom image, especially for three rows.
Have you considered mounting the overhead speakers on the side wall, as SVS recommend it?

Read here:
https://www.svsound.com/pages/prime-elevation
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Surround/top middle heights are angled PSB S50 high on the side wall right above the bipolar DT BP2 sides (so they play to both rows) Front heights are on a shelf pointing downward next to ceiling (PSB B15).

Rear heights will be mounted on the rear ceiling and angled down (PSB CS500), right above and slightly adjacent to the PSB X1T rear surrounds (same drivers in both).

Front L/R are also B15s, right under the height ones below the screen. Center is T45 (same drivers, but an extra woofer tower; I had 3 on order from two sources, but two never arrived (guy is dead or something; who knows; Amazon just canceled them).

Sub is a DT PF1500 15", 250 watt. I'm going to need a new sub for the back of the room, though (long narrow room acts like a bass trap). I've been eyeing the speedwoofer.

I'm still pondering the new front seats. I'm thinking about recliners with shaker motors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
Thanks it’s fine then.

It does does have physical and logical channels though, yes? The physical channels are the actual container tracks and the logical channels can utilize any speakers because they are steered via metadata.

So how many physical audio data channels total can be stored at a time? I heard 16?
Somewhere btw 16-18. BTW, the terminology is not " physical and logical channels" it's "channels & objects"

Theatrical atmos has 118 objects + 9.1 bed. Consumer atmos uses spatial coding to reduce & combine channels & objects so now there is no distinction between them.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
I got the rear heights (PSB CS500) installed, but due to the location of the studs, I could not put them exactly where I wanted (side heights are currently disconnected until I hook up the pro-logic processors to create a top middle location). The right speaker would be almost directly over the right lower rear surround speaker, but the left side is close to a foot towards the right. The best I could do to rectify the situation was to put the tweeter on the left side on the outside (towards left wall) and put the tweeter on the right side towards the left wall as well so that the tweeter on the right is closer to the left speaker thus creating an almost equidistance from the MLP to either tweeter. It sounded even in the test noise, in any case and despite being closer to each other, they actually sounded slightly wider to the ear than the lower speakers.

Front to back panning seemed compromised with the Dolby helicopter demo (it hung out too long in the front height before moving back too fast), but then I switched from from front/rear "height" to "ceiling" and it improved dramatically (jumped a much tinier distance and didn't hang out at all in the front, but moved 90% smoothly to the back. It's amazing the setting difference has such a big impact with that demo, but with other trailers, I barely noticed any difference other than some sounds moving back into the room a bit further. Only broad things like "rain" showed the hole and it's pretty small so the bridge should cover it just fine, I think.

The problem with the ceiling settings is that they don't work AT ALL with Auro3D so I'd have to save/load the two sets of settings to switch using that one. Fortunately, the height setting seemed fine with most actual real world material (and sounded pretty good panning from the 2nd row behind the MLP). I think with the top middle "bridge" in place, it will work fine (it sounded great when it was just front height + top middle, but didn't cover the full length of the room).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
Hey MagnumX, maybe you should start a build thread for your HT?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Hey MagnumX, maybe you should start a build thread for your HT?
A bit late now that it's almost done (save cleanup, new screen at some point, etc.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,726 Posts
Rear Heights & Rear Surrounds and Side/Surround Heights and Side Surround speakers. Midpoint on tweeters on rear heights are still centered (left of right and right of left) as I was stuck with where the joists were located (it sounds correct with the test tones). I'll connect the pro logic controllers and side heights to them probably on my next days off plus a 2-in-2-out speaker selector to let me swap rear height with side height instead of the extracted top middle channel for "ideal" Auro3D. That will complete Magnos-9.1.6 (extracted ceiling and matrixed wides). Ok, that sounds dumb, but worse than Scatmos? I dunno about that. Maybe MagneX? AuroMagnoX? I know. MagnavoX! :D

Then comes the boring fun of hiding wires, installing front drapes, etc.
 

Attachments

1541 - 1560 of 2318 Posts
Top