AVS Forum banner

58821 - 58840 of 58961 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
The sound of the bad guy smashing into a light fixture comes from the height speakers, which is pretty cool. But those speakers then go silent for the rest of the scene and the majority of the movie. A better Atmos mix would keep those speakers active with atmospheric and ambient noises, reflected sounds, and other effects to create a consistent bubble of sound around the listener.
Totally agree


There were other upmixers prior to DSU and Neural:X that could expand a 5.1 or 7.1 soundtrack to additional speakers. DTS Neo:X and Audyssey DSX could derive Front Wide channels between the front mains and surrounds. Neo:X and Dolby Pro Logic IIz could also create two Front Height channels above the front mains. That's probably what you're thinking of.
Ahhhh, yes, most likely you are right. Thanks for clearing that up for me.


Keep in mind that these upmixers do not know what's going on in the video content of the movie/game or know what specific sound effects are supposed to be. They derive extra speaker locations using phase correlation. The majority of audio that gets pushed to the height speakers are ambient sounds and reflections. If a specific sound effect was mixed in the ground channels, it's most likely to stay there. However, as I mentioned earlier, Neural:X is more aggressive with pushing some sound effects to the heights than DSU is.
Dang.. :-(

They should be trying to invent "Smart Upmixers" that even though wouldn't work for all scenarios/scenes it could at least have trigger sounds (for instance a helicopter and airplanes, birds, etc.. makes extremely unique sounds) and when it hears that it knows it needs to push that to the ceiling. As helicopters/planes are never on the ground, and even when they are, they would fill the sky with their sound too. Something like that.

Apply that to other possible sounds too. Issue is, is somethings like a light bulb smashing is not always in a unique sound/position so, the adaptive AI couldn't ever fix that I guess. But at least its a start. And eventually get to Smart Upmixers with adaptive AI that indeed try to literally "watch" your movie and figure out what needs to go where.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,818 Posts
Thanks Jonas. My ceilings are 9'. Unfortunately mounted speakers won't cut it with the wife, so it's gotta be in-ceilings. I'll do four total, one pair halfway back, and the other pair as far back as possible, which will end up being more or less directly overhead, maybe a TINY bit behind the MLP. I'm wondering if a tiny bit of angling back on that rear pair would help (even though I do understand it's more about where the sound originates from than where it's angled towards).

Once they're installed, will Audyssey decide if that rear pair is "Top Middle" vs. "Top Rear", or is that a manual setting I would have to make on the Marantz 8805?

Thanks again! If anyone else has thoughts on having the rear-most pair directly overhead (as opposed to behind ) the MLP, I'd love to hear them.
Yeah, like dfa973 already said, you'll manually indicate to the receiver what they are, and try them both. Not really a betting man, but if I was, I'd bet that top front/top middle will edge out top front/top rear, given the speaker placement. Atmos is somewhat tolerant, but that pair is definitely way out of tolerance as rears. I mean, Dolby specs. it the way they do for a reason, right? If it didn't matter, they wouldn't spec it as such. So, I don't know about every receiver/processor, but given the fact that at least some that process 4 Atmos, allow pairing as top front/top middle or top middle/to rear, or top front/rear, tells me the processor will account for this in ways specific to those configs, while making placement assumptions about the other speakers in the configuration, end result being the most accurate placement of the sound in space. If it didn't matter, I don't know why they'd bother accommodating it. :confused: Ain't no Atmos expert, just my opinion on the matter.

But that's the beauty of experimentation, you can prove it to yourself, and settle for what sounds best to you! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
Hello all,

I currently have a couple of Bose single array cubes (only 2 for 7.1.2) as my 2 Atmos or DTS:X Speakers. They are mounted on the ceiling at a 45 degree angle towards the listening position, about a foot in front of my main L and R channel.

Question is: Shall i set these at Front Height? Top Front, or Top middle?

I know someone might say to test and whatever suits me, but id rather have an answer from experience what you all would do.




(PS I know one cube is black and one silver :) I bought a single Silver Cube in 2006 to serve as my center channel with my new SXRD Sony TV, and couldn't find a good condition silver on ebay to match last month....just got black :) :))
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,036 Posts
Hello all,

I currently have a couple of Bose single array cubes (only 2 for 7.1.2) as my 2 Atmos or DTS:X Speakers. They are mounted on the ceiling at a 45 degree angle towards the listening position, about a foot in front of my main L and R channel.

Question is: Shall i set these at Front Height? Top Front, or Top middle?

I know someone might say to test and whatever suits me, but id rather have an answer from experience what you all would do.




(PS I know one cube is black and one silver :) I bought a single Silver Cube in 2006 to serve as my center channel with my new SXRD Sony TV, and couldn't find a good condition silver on ebay to match last month....just got black :) :))

If you only have one pair oh height speakers I would set them as Top Middle. If you ever get around to adding a pair behind you I would rename them as Top Front and name the behind speakers Top Rear.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Hello all,

I currently have a couple of Bose single array cubes (only 2 for 7.1.2) as my 2 Atmos or DTS:X Speakers. They are mounted on the ceiling at a 45 degree angle towards the listening position, about a foot in front of my main L and R channel.

Question is: Shall i set these at Front Height? Top Front, or Top middle?

I know someone might say to test and whatever suits me, but id rather have an answer from experience what you all would do.




(PS I know one cube is black and one silver :) I bought a single Silver Cube in 2006 to serve as my center channel with my new SXRD Sony TV, and couldn't find a good condition silver on ebay to match last month....just got black :) :))

I would set them as front heights. But afaik, with .2 height/tops they all get the same signal anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
438 Posts
Going on in checking Atmos releases from Tidal. Here's a really good one: Deutsche Grammophon LISA BATIASHVILI City Lights. It's a compilation of various violin adapted tracks. Cheched Dvorák Simphony n.9 (Atmos) and compared it to (Master stream) upmixed in Auro 3D. I prefer Auro but the difference this time is so so much subtle (I haven't listened to this adapted version before, so ...) that I couldn't tell what the difference is between one version and the other (at least my non experienced ears couldn't) !
But cleanliness, dynamics are in both versions! Good work, Grammophon!
Some other opinions out there?
Regards
Alessandro
Edit: checked track nr. 11(Koncz) and I have mixed opinions. Don't know which is better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dfa973

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
Kinda basic placement question?

Ok, I have a Yamaha RX-V683 AVR set up with front soundstage (L-C-F), sub and 4 surround speakers mounted at ceiling level (2 on the back wall directly above MLP and 2 mounted on sides about 2 ft. in front of MLP and 10 ft from the fronts). All surrounds are mounted about 11 ft high. This was the configuration I installed years ago to support my Denon 7.1 layout. Now that I have the Yamaha AVR with Atmos 2 channel support for 5.1.2 I designated the 2 side surrounds as my Front Presence Speakers (FPL is what Yamaha calls their height or Atmos speakers). However, the Yamaha set-up indicates the 2 FPL speakers need to be part of the front soundstage and mounted on or in-ceiling above the front L and R speakers. So, my question is does it really matter with only 2 height (Atmos) speakers where they are mounted in relation to the front soundstage? I can hear them firing when playing Atmos encoded tracks or when upmixed with DSU but would they sound better front-mounted which would be about 12 ft away and mounted about 11 ft high?
I have attached a couple of pics. One shows where the surrounds are now and the other is where they would need to be moved to support Yamaha's guide (above front soundstage). Thanks for any recommendations or comments.
 

Attachments

  • Like
Reactions: hollisesco

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,036 Posts
Ok, I have a Yamaha RX-V683 AVR set up with front soundstage (L-C-F), sub and 4 surround speakers mounted at ceiling level (2 on the back wall directly above MLP and 2 mounted on sides about 2 ft. in front of MLP and 10 ft from the fronts). All surrounds are mounted about 11 ft high. This was the configuration I installed years ago to support my Denon 7.1 layout. Now that I have the Yamaha AVR with Atmos 2 channel support for 5.1.2 I designated the 2 side surrounds as my Front Presence Speakers (FPL is what Yamaha calls their height or Atmos speakers). However, the Yamaha set-up indicates the 2 FPL speakers need to be part of the front soundstage and mounted on or in-ceiling above the front L and R speakers. So, my question is does it really matter with only 2 height (Atmos) speakers where they are mounted in relation to the front soundstage? I can hear them firing when playing Atmos encoded tracks or when upmixed with DSU but would they sound better front-mounted which would be about 12 ft away and mounted about 11 ft high?
I have attached a couple of pics. One shows where the surrounds are now and the other is where they would need to be moved to support Yamaha's guide (above front soundstage). Thanks for any recommendations or comments.
You do not need to place the height speakers up front. See the attached from Yamaha's website here: https://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio_visual/av_receivers_amps/rx-v683_u/index.html Note the overhead speaker locations available. Where you have proposed placing them should work nicely. Please note however for best placement of speakers in an Atmos system you will want your base layer speakers (5.1) at ear height or just above and only your height speakers on the ceiling or high up on the wall near the ceiling like you are proposing. The reason being is to create separation from the base layer and the height layer to create the 3D sound bubble we are striving for with Atmos and DTSX. It will be very difficult to create that distinction if all of the speakers are located in the height plain. You have a lovely room there and I can see why that might not be desirable from an aesthetic perspective but if you want to hear Atmos the way it was intended you will want to find a way to bring down those base layer speakers.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
732 Posts
Looking for a little help on atmos speaker placement. I have had a 7.1.6 system but I am in amidst of adjusting my seating location and changing top speakers.
What I have:
Denon X8500 upporting 7.1.6 or 9.1.4
Room: 23 x 14 x 8
First row at 12 feet from screen
There is a second row but not the primary concern place at about 17 ft from the screen.

I am considering going to 9.1.4 and do wide speakers instead of 6 height speakers. If I do this would performance suffer? It looks like the angles would be around 36 deg or so if my math is right which appears to be within the spec. Or if I went with 9.1.4 would it be better to run the top speakers at about 45 degress. Speakers will be smaller aimable bookshelf speakers rather than ceiling speakers (if that matters). So it either case I can aim them towards the listening position. I am wanting the layout to be good for Atmos/DTS Pro (coming in december to the Denon X8500). Any thoughts on layout suggestions would be helpful.
I guess it gets down to is a FH/RH (place on the front and back wall) layout a good idea with my room dimensions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
My room is 13' x 16' x 10'. I'm only concerned with MLP which is currently 7' from the back wall but can be moved back if necessary. I'm going for 7.2.4 with in-ceiling Top Speakers.

1. Should my surrounds be monopole or bipole?

2. Should my in-ceiling Tops be monopole or bipole?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,256 Posts
My room is 13' x 16' x 10'. I'm only concerned with MLP which is currently 7' from the back wall but can be moved back if necessary. I'm going for 7.2.4 with in-ceiling Top Speakers.

1. Should my surrounds be monopole or bipole?

2. Should my in-ceiling Tops be monopole or bipole?
You don't indicate what your current speakers are. Are you going to replace them all?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,116 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
My room is 13' x 16' x 10'. I'm only concerned with MLP which is currently 7' from the back wall but can be moved back if necessary. I'm going for 7.2.4 with in-ceiling Top Speakers.

1. Should my surrounds be monopole or bipole?

2. Should my in-ceiling Tops be monopole or bipole?
I would go with monopoles all around for that setup.

If you're going in-ceiling, you might want to find out the ones with the best aimed response and that also have matching bed level speakers. Personally, I find it more important to having matching drivers wherever possible across the line. All my drivers, for example are the same size and make, although the rear four speakers are a newer model (necessary to mount them on the ceiling and fit the slimmer towers in the space provided; fortunately they have the same timbre. The drivers are updated versions of the same size ones, however). With 17 speakers, the sound matches seamlessly despite 5 different models from PSB (14 speakers of which have identical drivers). I also would go with 3 matching front speakers, if possible instead of a "center channel speaker" which even with the same drivers, never seem to match the dispersion pattern leading to people wishing they had things like "Center Spread" in DSU when it doesn't matter with identical speakers.

In other words, even if you're going to use tower speakers only for the front, try to find a bookshelf pair with the same midrange/tweeters and hopefully the same for the ceiling, but that may be more difficult to match up given the size of most in-ceiling speakers. I went with on-ceiling speakers in the back (it's a PSB Image B speaker inside an enclosure that can be aimed and mounted on a ceiling or wall called the PSB CS500). My "surround heights" (also doing "top middle" duty) are bipoles, but they're aimed to the front/back rows, not being used to create a null of any sort. I basically reused them from my 6.1 setup and it fits the Auro-3D setup perfectly and with my not-so-wide room suffices for top middle as well. I put actual bookshelf speakers on the top row of my bookshelf in the front aimed downward, only because it would have looked terrible to mount speakers on the ceiling just in front of the bookshelf and I wanted "heights" so to use the full ceiling length plus work with Auro-3D. I have top middle to bridge them so it's perfectly even, but then I have three rows of seating.

But for only the MLP and using "tops" in-ceiling, monopoles are the way to go for sure for the sharpest possible imaging.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,256 Posts
Given your 88" OLED, your budget, in comparison, can be whatever you are willing to spend. Given that, I would suggest your base layer of speakers, including the wides, should all be the same drivers. For the height speakers, you can go the same way or somewhat depart from the base layer. There isn't a lot of stress put on the height speakers, compared to the all important center speaker. Monopole or dipole? I would see no reason in a home theater to choose dipoles. Your media room has about the same width dimensions as my home theater room and I went with 9.2.6, not that the third pair of middle height speakers makes much of a difference because of virtual imaging between the front and rear height speakers. The same rationale could be applied to wides in that there could be a virtual image between the front speakers and the two surround speakers. I went with the 9.2.6 because I could, given the redoing of my own home theater room in which placements of speakers were somewhat hampered by what is in the room.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
Given your 88" OLED, your budget, in comparison, can be whatever you are willing to spend. Given that, I would suggest your base layer of speakers, including the wides
Including the wides? He said 7.2.4, not 9.2.4.

Monopole or dipole? I would see no reason in a home theater to choose dipoles.
He said monopole or bipole, not dipole.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Actually I just realized I don't HAVE to do in-ceiling. I could just as easily mount them if that provides better options. But I definitely want them in the Top positions rather than Height.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,725 Posts
Actually I just realized I don't HAVE to do in-ceiling. I could just as easily mount them if that provides better options. But I definitely want them in the Top positions rather than Height.
I recommend PSB while you can still get the current lineup. PSB X1T or X2T towers and/or Image B bookshelves plus either CS500 or CS1000 for on-ceiling mounts (latter has deeper bass on each case) and your choice of sub and you'll be all set.

There are other good brands out there, of course, but few are rated +/- 1dB across most of the range for the price.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,628 Posts
Actually I just realized I don't HAVE to do in-ceiling. I could just as easily mount them if that provides better options. But I definitely want them in the Top positions rather than Height.
I would do in-ceiling's if you can. They work really well to make the Atmos bubble seamless, and aesthetically you can't beat the look.
 
58821 - 58840 of 58961 Posts
Top