AVS Forum banner

481 - 500 of 541 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #481
Craig,


Have you considered changing out your Marantz pre-pro with a different one? If you get a processor with even a slightly higher channel count, you can have your front wides as well as all the other speakers active. Just make sure that the unit can be upgraded to DTS: X Pro whenever that is added to units outside of the Trinnov. I don't recommend Emotiva processors given their track record, however.
Hi Dan,

The Marantz has 15.2 channels available, but it can only process and output 13.2 at a time. Also, it won't use the Wide channels on anything except native Atmos content that has metadata for Wides. The DSU won't use them under any circumstance, and DTS NeuralX will only use them if the Rear Surrounds are disabled.

Do you know of a processor that can output 13 to 15 channels simultaneously, or will use the Wides for both upmixers, without going to the expense of something like a Trinnov or DataSat? I am not aware of any, nor am I aware of any (more) affordable processors that are coming out with DTS:X Pro capability. If you know of something... I'm all ears! ;)

In the Triad thread, you asked about my backboxes for the RSL C32e's. They are built out of 3/4" MDF. They 23.75" square and 5.5 " tall, Outside Dimensions. This makes the internal volume 1,980 cubic inches. One cubic foot is 1728 cubic inches, so my boxes are 1.15 cubic feet, which is close enough to the RSL recommended 1.2 cubic feet. The internal seams are sealed with rubber caulking and the boxes are stuffed with polyfill. They are 1/4" shy of 2' x 2' and that allows them to drop perfectly and snugly into my 2 x 2 ceiling gridwork.

Craig
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,321 Posts
Hi Dan,

The Marantz has 15.2 channels available, but it can only process and output 13.2 at a time. Also, it won't use the Wide channels on anything except native Atmos content that has metadata for Wides. The DSU won't use them under any circumstance, and DTS NeuralX will only use them if the Rear Surrounds are disabled.

Do you know of a processor that can output 13 to 15 channels simultaneously, or will use the Wides for both upmixers, without going to the expense of something like a Trinnov or DataSat? I am not aware of any, nor am I aware of any (more) affordable processors that are coming out with DTS:X Pro capability. If you know of something... I'm all ears! ;)

In the Triad thread, you asked about my backboxes for the RSL C32e's. They are built out of 3/4" MDF. They 23.75" square and 5.5 " tall, Outside Dimensions. This makes the internal volume 1,980 cubic inches. One cubic foot is 1728 cubic inches, so my boxes are 1.15 cubic feet, which is close enough to the RSL recommended 1.2 cubic feet. The internal seams are sealed with rubber caulking and the boxes are stuffed with polyfill. They are 1/4" shy of 2' x 2' and that allows them to drop perfectly and snugly into my 2 x 2 ceiling gridwork.

Craig

Thanks for the info on the backer boxes!



The Monoprice Monolith HTP-1 (built by ATI) checks off many of the boxes you are looking for. It does 16 channels (up to 9.1.6 or 9.2.4). It has Dirac with an upcoming Bass Management Module (to get the highest tiers of sub management calibration, there is an upgrade fee from Dirac - nothing to do with Monoprice - but the base tier of BMM is free). The HTP-1 is upgradeable to DTS: X Pro for free (this will allow native DTS: X and Neural: X upmixing to use all speaker outputs), and will be eligible for a paid HDMI 2.1 board upgrade in the future. Dolby Surround upmixing does not allow for front wide synthesis, so ATI devised a way to output matrixed Front Wide audio channels in different modes. This feature is disabled with native Dolby Atmos or DTS: X Pro modes (when available) due to Pro already allowing for Front Wides with all other speakers active and Dolby Labs restricting the use of upmixers on top of Atmos.


It is not absolutely perfect, but is far more stable out of the box than Emotiva or even the JBL Synthesis SDP-55, which have been plagued with firmware problems. Monoprice has been willing to add features and upgrades that customers have asked for. The interface is quite slick and user friendly. Firmware updates have been frequent to address various issues, again, unlike the once awesome Synthesis brand.


The HTP-1 was also measuring much better than the current crop of high end Denon and Marantz flagships.


In order to keep the price at just shy of $4,000, you do need to purchase a separate Dirac compatible microphone (they don't break the bank, thankfully), but then you can choose whichever calibration mic model that meets your needs.


https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=37887
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,212 Posts
I can’t comment on the processor but Dirac is about a gazillion times better than Audyssey and ATI is an excellent company. I have three of their amps!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #484
Thanks for the info on the backer boxes!



The Monoprice Monolith HTP-1 (built by ATI) checks off many of the boxes you are looking for. It does 16 channels (up to 9.1.6 or 9.2.4). It has Dirac with an upcoming Bass Management Module (to get the highest tiers of sub management calibration, there is an upgrade fee from Dirac - nothing to do with Monoprice - but the base tier of BMM is free). The HTP-1 is upgradeable to DTS: X Pro for free (this will allow native DTS: X and Neural: X upmixing to use all speaker outputs), and will be eligible for a paid HDMI 2.1 board upgrade in the future. Dolby Surround upmixing does not allow for front wide synthesis, so ATI devised a way to output matrixed Front Wide audio channels in different modes. This feature is disabled with native Dolby Atmos or DTS: X Pro modes (when available) due to Pro already allowing for Front Wides with all other speakers active and Dolby Labs restricting the use of upmixers on top of Atmos.


It is not absolutely perfect, but is far more stable out of the box than Emotiva or even the JBL Synthesis SDP-55, which have been plagued with firmware problems. Monoprice has been willing to add features and upgrades that customers have asked for. The interface is quite slick and user friendly. Firmware updates have been frequent to address various issues, again, unlike the once awesome Synthesis brand.


The HTP-1 was also measuring much better than the current crop of high end Denon and Marantz flagships.


In order to keep the price at just shy of $4,000, you do need to purchase a separate Dirac compatible microphone (they don't break the bank, thankfully), but then you can choose whichever calibration mic model that meets your needs.


https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=37887
Thanks Dan. The Monoprice unit looks interesting, but is "Out of Stock" with no mention when it will be back in stock. It appears to have 3 sub outs, but those outputs look like they can also be assigned to the Wides? If one uses it that way, does that leave only 1 Subwoofer output? I don't see a link to the manual so I can't tell. (Nevermind, I found a link to the manual in the Monolith thread.)

Also, I owned a miniDSP DDRC88A for about 6 months back before I went to Atmos. I must have run the Dirac routine 100 times. I tried multiple target curves. I tried multiple different mic placement strategies. I played with levels and gains. I never, in 6 months, got Dirac to sound as good as Audyssey. I was never able to measure anything in-room that was remotely close to the target curves in Dirac, even with multiple, spatially averaged measurements trying to mimic the mic placements I used for the Dirac measuerments. I deleted alll the measurements after I sold it, or I could show you the confusing response graphs I got. When I finally went back to Audyssey, I was like "AHHHH... THAT's what it supposed to sound like!" I don't know if I had a defective unit, or if I was the defective part. I know my experience is not widely shared by most of the forum users, (Chuck included). Nonetheless, I am a little gun shy. :eek:

I'll do some more reading in that that thread. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Craig
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,321 Posts
Thanks Dan. The Monoprice unit looks interesting, but is "Out of Stock" with no mention when it will be back in stock. It appears to have 3 sub outs, but those outputs look like they can also be assigned to the Wides? If one uses it that way, does that leave only 1 Subwoofer output? I don't see a link to the manual so I can't tell. (Nevermind, I found a link to the manual in the Monolith thread.)

Also, I owned a miniDSP DDRC88A for about 6 months back before I went to Atmos. I must have run the Dirac routine 100 times. I tried multiple target curves. I tried multiple different mic placement strategies. I played with levels and gains. I never, in 6 months, got Dirac to sound as good as Audyssey. I was never able to measure anything in-room that was remotely close to the target curves in Dirac, even with multiple, spatially averaged measurements trying to mimic the mic placements I used for the Dirac measuerments. I deleted alll the measurements after I sold it, or I could show you the confusing response graphs I got. When I finally went back to Audyssey, I was like "AHHHH... THAT's what it supposed to sound like!" I don't know if I had a defective unit, or if I was the defective part. I know my experience is not widely shared by most of the forum users, (Chuck included). Nonetheless, I am a little gun shy. :eek:

I'll do some more reading in that that thread. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Craig

The current target is early June for the next shipment from ATI in California. However, the virus is calling the shots right now and probably will be for some time to come given the absolutely appalling general response from governments across the board at local, state, and federal (just different levels of bad and incompetence).

The HTP-1 is like a mini Datasat processor given that ATI also builds Datasat products and there's a lot of cross platforming involved. In fact, ATI scrapped their own processor because it was going to be so similar to the HTP-1.

Quite a few higher end processors have moved to Dirac. Maybe you just had a bum unit. That can happen. However, it's always possible that in a year to a year and a half that D+M will come out with new flagship units that address higher channel counts, DTS: X Pro, etc. unless we're under another lock down scenario.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,212 Posts
Also, I owned a miniDSP DDRC88A for about 6 months back before I went to Atmos. I must have run the Dirac routine 100 times. I tried multiple target curves. I tried multiple different mic placement strategies. I played with levels and gains. I never, in 6 months, got Dirac to sound as good as Audyssey. I was never able to measure anything in-room that was remotely close to the target curves in Dirac, even with multiple, spatially averaged measurements trying to mimic the mic placements I used for the Dirac measuerments. I deleted alll the measurements after I sold it, or I could show you the confusing response graphs I got. When I finally went back to Audyssey, I was like "AHHHH... THAT's what it supposed to sound like!" I don't know if I had a defective unit, or if I was the defective part. I know my experience is not widely shared by most of the forum users, (Chuck included). Nonetheless, I am a little gun shy. :eek:

I'll do some more reading in that that thread. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

Craig

While I have no doubts about your experience, I find it to be so bizarre. And knowing you, I'm sure you gave it every opportunity.

Given my experiences with moving from Audyssey to Dirac and and those of calibration clients I helped and several friends, I can only assume it had to be the platform on which Dirac was running. The positive differences between Dirac and Audyssey were so profound in each case that it was actually hard to believe. Much better bass integration and the overall sense of envelopment was so much improved. Speakers just disappeared. In each case, however, it was a Datasat. Either the LS10 or the RS20i. Of course, there were other platform options that may certainly have been part of the success - like cross-over slope and type selection. While you could probably buy a used LS10 for a fair price, it currently only supports 11 active channels (7.x.4) and I doubt that it will be upgraded to handle DTS:X Pro

Maybe when the ATI product gets back in stock you can get one with some kind of return policy.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #487
While I have no doubts about your experience, I find it to be so bizarre. And knowing you, I'm sure you gave it every opportunity.

Given my experiences with moving from Audyssey to Dirac and and those of calibration clients I helped and several friends, I can only assume it had to be the platform on which Dirac was running. The positive differences between Dirac and Audyssey were so profound in each case that it was actually hard to believe. Much better bass integration and the overall sense of envelopment was so much improved. Speakers just disappeared. In each case, however, it was a Datasat. Either the LS10 or the RS20i. Of course, there were other platform options that may certainly have been part of the success - like cross-over slope and type selection. While you could probably buy a used LS10 for a fair price, it currently only supports 11 active channels (7.x.4) and I doubt that it will be upgraded to handle DTS:X Pro

Maybe when the ATI product gets back in stock you can get one with some kind of return policy.
Yeah, the whole Dirac experience was totally confounding to me. I was expecting, based on all the forum hype, that I would be able to improve on Audyssey with Dirac. I never got it to that point... not even close. And after listening, I would take measurements to try to see what was wrong... and everything was wrong! The measurements were never smooth, and they never reflected the target curve.

I see they now have a Bass Management module, and that may improve things, but the bass wasn't the only area where I had problems. The full range of the response was f'd. I even tried cutting of the EQ at 300 Hz. Surprising, the response above 300 Hz was still different after even this change! My conclusion was that I either had a defective unit, or the user was defective. I contacted the guy who bought my DDRC 88A to see if he ever got it to work, but he said he never even set it up and he sold it a few months after receiving it. So I guess I'll never know which part was defective, me or the device. :confused:

Right now, I have my system set up with the Rear Surrounds disabled, which allows me to use the Wides with DTS Neural:X. I love the widened front soundstage I get with that setting. I also love the seam;ess of the pans when sounds move from Front to Wides to Sides. I don't miss the RS's that much because the Rear Overheads take up some of that slack. If I watch an Atmos movie that uses the Wides, I'll turn the RS's back on, and I then get the full 9.3.4 effects... and that is spectacular! But a lot of what we watch is streamed and doesn't have Atmos, so I'm limited to Neural:X. I think I'm just gonna wait until someone comes out with a more affordable DTS:X Pro processor with Audyssey, (or the unlikely event that Marantz does a DTS:X Pro upgrade for my 8805.) For me, that would be the best solution.

I can't wait to be able to travel again so I can check out the Oconee Theater! :) That may change my mind!

Craig
 
  • Like
Reactions: BP1Fanatic

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #488
@Dan Hitchman I've often wondered what your signature means: "Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Lite™ print-outs must stop!!" :confused: Can you fill me in? Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,321 Posts
@Dan Hitchman I've often wondered what your signature means: "Listen up, studios! Dolby Atmos Liteâ„¢ print-outs must stop!!" /forum/images/smilies/confused.gif Can you fill me in? Thanks!
Some studio (mostly Disney 4k titles, but occasionally others) home Atmos mixes are locked/fixed to limited channel counts like 7.1.2 (bed channels only), 7.1.4, or 7.1.6.

The 3D objects (often behaving more like channels than pannable objects) are limited in movement and scalability to those particular speaker layouts and cannot address the full 24.1.10 home Atmos speaker layout.

These types of limited Atmos encodes render more sophisticated Atmos processors (like the Trinnov, Monolith HTP-1, JBL Synthesis, Datasat, etc.) moot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
Right now, I have my system set up with the Rear Surrounds disabled, which allows me to use the Wides with DTS Neural:X. I love the widened front soundstage I get with that setting. I also love the seam;ess of the pans when sounds move from Front to Wides to Sides. I don't miss the RS's that much because the Rear Overheads take up some of that slack. If I watch an Atmos movie that uses the Wides, I'll turn the RS's back on, and I then get the full 9.3.4 effects... and that is spectacular! But a lot of what we watch is streamed and doesn't have Atmos, so I'm limited to Neural:X. I think I'm just gonna wait until someone comes out with a more affordable DTS:X Pro processor with Audyssey, (or the unlikely event that Marantz does a DTS:X Pro upgrade for my 8805.) For me, that would be the best solution.

I can't wait to be able to travel again so I can check out the Oconee Theater! :) That may change my mind!

Craig
I love Neural:X! It definitely has a wider soundstage than Dolby.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #491
Some studio (mostly Disney 4k titles, but occasionally others) home Atmos mixes are locked/fixed to limited channel counts like 7.1.2 (bed channels only), 7.1.4, or 7.1.6.

The 3D objects (often behaving more like channels than pannable objects) are limited in movement and scalability to those particular speaker layouts and cannot address the full 24.1.10 home Atmos speaker layout.

These types of limited Atmos encodes render more sophisticated Atmos processors (like the Trinnov, Monolith HTP-1, JBL Synthesis, Datasat, etc.) moot.
Thanks! Is there a database of these movies?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #492
I love Neural:X! It definitely has a wider soundstage than Dolby.
I love it too! I just wish I could use my full speaker compliment with it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,212 Posts
Craig: I just have to wonder if the mic you used for running Dirac was (very) faulty. These inexpensive mics do fail. I assume you sold the mic when you sold the miniDSP but if not, it would be (fairly) easy to check it out. When you said where the actual results looked nothing like the target just suggests something like a bad mic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,400 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,400 Posts
Netflix also lets you search by Dolby Atmos.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #497
My new screen is installed! It's a SeymourAV 2.35:1, retractable electric screen with side masking. At 105" wide and 115" diagonal, it's slightly smaller than my previous screen, which was 110" wide and 120" diagonal. I downsized slightly at my wife's request as she experienced motion sickness on widescreen action moves with lots of left/right, right/left panning. Our seating is only 9.5' from the screen so the image is quite immersive even though its not huge. The new screen uses their CenterStage UF AT screen material. My old screen used their older CenterStage material, which was a generation BEFORE the XD material. It had a fairly wide open weave which let a lot of light through the screen, reducing brightness, which I wasn't aware of until I got the new screen. Even though the new screen has a lower gain specification, the image is actually actually brighter and the colors have more "pop" than the old screen! Its also more detailed, smoother and crisper than the old screen. The retractable side masks make 16:9 viewing much better by eliminating the gray pillars on the sides of the image.

I demo'd it for my wife by playing a few scenes from King Kong, (the brontosaurus stampede and the scene were Kong Kong fights 3 T-Rex's.) The first thing she mentioned was that the picture looked more dimensional. Then she said it looked brighter and the colors looked better. Finally, when demo was done, I asked her if she experienced any motion sensitivities. "Nope!" She's happy.. so Daddy is happy! I'm fine with the slightly smaller screen. The improvement in picture quality is well worth the tradeoff! I'll post up some pictures soon.

A very big THANK YOU to forum members @reg152 and @DMark1 for the help with the design of the mounting system and the installation. These guys went way above and beyond and I truly appreciate their help!!! The screen ended up being *perfectly* aligned with the projector and is so solidly installed that I can literally hang from the screen. We used a UniStrut system and threaded steel rods to suspend the screen from the joists. It looks GREAT and very professional! Thanks again guys!

Craig
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan Hitchman

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,926 Posts
Discussion Starter #499
Pic's of the new screen:

Screen up:


Screen down in full Widescreen Cinemascope screen.


Here's a couple screenshots:




Masks down in 16:9 mode. This appears small, but it is actually a 92" diagonal image, which is still bigger than most any OLED or QLED flat panel TV.


Here's some screen shots:






The mounting system. The threaded steel rods go up through the ceiling tiles and attach to the UniStrut system mounted to the joists above the suspended ceiling.


This is Seymour's new tab tensioning system. The webbing is new and probably helps to spread the tensioning over a wider area. You can also see the density of the weave of the ULF material.


Finally, these are the new remotes, 1 each for the screen and the masks:


I'm gonna hafta get a Universal remote that can be programed for these and all my other remotes. This has become MADNESS! :eek:

Craig
 
481 - 500 of 541 Posts
Top