A few more thoughts about the whole subject of immersive audio, various technologies used to reproduce it, and the need to keep an ope, experimentative mind.
It's been my inderstanding that there is height information even in material not encoded in Atmos, DTS X, or Auro 3D. When microphones pick up sound, there is a lt of information that gets recorded, including complex reflections, and variations in amplitide and frequency. Again, from my understanding a lot of this information is preserved even in stereo, 5,1, etc. So I found this interesting in an article about Dolby Pro Logic IIz:
"...Most surround sound solutions use digital signal processing (DSP) to artificially model listening environments. Expanding on proven Dolby Pro Logic IIx technology, Dolby Pro Logic IIz identifies and decodes spatial cues that occur naturally in all content—stereo and 5.1 broadcast, music CDs, DVDs, 5.1- and 7.1-channel Blu-ray Discs™, and video games. It then processes ambient sound and certain amorphous effects such as rain or wind and directs them to the front height speakers...."
Based on my recent research, I have couple of observations:I'm still waiting for a response from Nakamichi regarding my question about Atmos source material. With regards to the soundbar, it should reproduce DTS X height effects utilizing DTS Virtual X. Unlike the Yamaha YAS 207, the Soundbar does have a decoder to interpret the height information, and then reproduce it using Virtual X. This will be interesting to hear, as in this case you will have a good number of physical speakers around the room as a basis for the Virtual X effect.
I did find out that all of the drivers on the Ultra 9.2 Soundbar are new and upgraded over the 7.1 Pro, which is good news.
Regarding Atmos, it's not just that it requires either ceiling or ceiling reflecting speakers, but it also appears to require fairly specific placement horizontally. DTS X can work with many different combinations of speakers.
The reason I speculated about whether the output of Blu-ray players had an effect on how these various soundbars handle source material, is based on the long discussion on the Samsung 950 thread, as that sound bar decodes Atmos but not DTS. It emerged that a number of players could convert the Atmos encoded discs into a form that the 950 could handle. It may be that this is converted to 5.1, but as the Samsung does have an Atmos decoder, and does also virtualize height from 5.1 sources, I was wondering about something similar with the Nakamichi.
I think with a number of these devices you have to simply try them, and not argue a priori what effects a particular device can and cannot do. I go back to my old TV with its simple surround simulation mode. I'm sure there is no decoder present, but with some audio sources I can hear effects far to the right and left of the TV, and sometimes quite a bit to the sides. Sometimes the effect is so dramatic that I look to see if something is actually there.
Even with the lowly YAS 207, I'm willing to bet some discs sound more convincing than others. One of the reviews I read tested the movie Spectre and also Inferno, and these apparently produced pretty pleasing atmospheric effects that were consistent with the film.
I think you put it pretty well, and make excellent points. Although it's all hypothetical until we hear it, the Nakamichi offers something that the Sony doesn't offer yet...rear speakers. And Atmos 7.1.2 isn't full 7.1.4. Moreover the potential for rear and sides, and the sonic presence of two subs is persuasive, Lastly, from my emails with Nakamichi, it looks like they're putting a lot of engineering into their drivers,Based on my recent research, I have couple of observations:
DTSX doesn't require height speakers while dolby Atmos has strict requirement on the speaker placement, including at least a pair of height speaker in order to work properly. DTSX can have some form of virtualisation via front speakers, even without virtual X technology in place...
...I am still looking around to find out whats the best deal for my home entertainment system. Maybe I should give the Ultra 9.2 a go since the reviews on previous nakamichi sound bar were pretty good.
Ya dual wireless subs and rear speakers are the key factors that get me interested into the new nakamichi solution. it is rare to see such configuration nowadays in the market. I don't mind to spare a bit more space for the setup if the system can get the sound right in my space. I am not exactly sure about the whole virtualisation thingy can do the job in my space with the high ceiling design. Discrete surround speakers do give me better assurance for better surround audio effects.I think you put it pretty well, and make excellent points. Although it's all hypothetical until we hear it, the Nakamichi offers something that the Sony doesn't offer yet...rear speakers. And Atmos 7.1.2 isn't full 7.1.4. Moreover the potential for rear and sides, and the sonic presence of two subs is persuasive, Lastly, from my emails with Nakamichi, it looks like they're putting a lot of engineering into their drivers,
Oh yes you are right. I didn't mention it clearly I was actually referring to those who involved ceiling-bound Atmos soundbar, like the Sony HT-ST5000. But it is great to know that the virtualisation is independent of my ceiling.The virualization is completely independent of your ceilings, It's using phase, delay, and amplitude variations to tell your brain and ears where the sound is coming from. No reflections involved.
Well I guess for your case, having discrete surround speakers will produce better and more consistent result than a single soundbar with audio bouncing off here and there.I think this will be fine for me. After a certain point all the gimmicks don't matter.
The only thing that concerns me is that since I don't have a wall on one side of my room I'll have to keep the speakers together. The person I interacted with from
Nakamichi said that in that configuration it will still provide better imaging than the 7.2 setup.
That reviewer says there are no wires running across the living room- that is my biggest concern. I'm wondering if I should cancel my order for the 9.2 and go with the 7.2?Found this review on the 7.2 channel version on Amazon.
Cannot wait to get mine.
That review must be wrong. The difference between the 7.2 and 9.2 is the addition of side speaker for the 9.2 (or a dipole double, rear speaker if you choose). The satellites are not wireless from all I've read. I would keep the 9.2 for superior sound.
To my understanding, there are two normal RCA type wires that run from each subwoofer to the rear speakers (Dipole or 9.2).That reviewer says there are no wires running across the living room- that is my biggest concern. I'm wondering if I should cancel my order for the 9.2 and go with the 7.2?
If I keep the 9.2 speakers together hopefully that should solve the problem.
I think the difference is more power, two more rear speakers and 10" Vs 8" Subwoofers from what I have read, not sure if there are other technical differences.That review must be wrong. The difference between the 7.2 and 9.2 is the addition of side speaker for the 9.2 (or a dipole double, rear speaker if you choose). The satellites are not wireless from all I've read. I would keep the 9.2 for superior sound.