Proposed Universal Speaker Layout for 3D Immersive Surround Sound

What is the Best Universal Speaker Layout for 3D Immersive Surround Sound?

  • Classic 11.1 with front/rear height channels mounted on the upper walls

    Votes: 2 40.0%
  • 7.1.4 with 4 in-ceiling speakers front/back

    Votes: 1 20.0%
  • 7.1.4 with Dolby Atmos reflection speakers bouncing sound off the ceiling

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 7.1 is all that is needed. Focus on quality of speakers and placement as a primary goal.

    Votes: 2 40.0%

  • Total voters
    5
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator


With Dolby Atmos, Auro-3D and DTS:X upon us, why has there been no universally accepted speaker layout proposed to accommodate all three competing Immersive Surround formats?

The “classic 11.2” configuration originally introduced by Yamaha's flagship RX-Z11 AV Receiver back in 2007 mentioned in the article was NOT proposed, which surprises, because one can imagine this configuration to get closer to the “ideal” configuration for all three formats and certainly with MUCH better results than bouncing sound off the ceiling via Dolby-Enabled speakers.

For those willing and able to go beyond 7.1. we propose a universal 11.2 speaker layout to ease compatibility and ensure constantly good performance for ALL formats and all seated locations in your home theater.

Check out our Proposal for a Universal Speaker Layout for 3D Immersive Surround Sound

What do you think?
 
T

THXguru

Audiophyte
Very nice work, going into the specs of all those formats. This sounds indeed reasonable. Theoretically, the height speakers should be at 37.5° elevation, because for Atmos the optimum is at 45°, while for Auro3D it is 30° (see datasatdigital .com/docs/archive/speaker-tech-guide.pdf).

It is indeed not only convenient but also very necessary to have one standard layout, so that at least one part of the audio production chain is common between the formats (it will be difficult enough to overcome incompatibilities in creation and encoding/transmission of audio content). And it is still better to have this one standard with lots of devices and content for it, than several standards with mediocre choice of devices and content.

However -- such a standard layout as a "least common denominator" of all formats would be pretty much obligatory if one wants to cover them all. That means that all speaker setup flexibility, which DTS:X, Atmos and object-oriented audio in general are promising, is gone. You may be able to choose a subset of 11.2 (or 7.2.4), but not a really different configuration, which in non-standard living rooms may be the better choice. For example, you could scale the front sound stage in order to adapt it to your screen size. You can do this by simply placing your front speakers next to your screen. But with audio objects *and* a system allowing flexible speaker placement, your front speakers could be almost anywhere and still have the on-screen sounds match your image. Another case is a rather long and wide listening room, where 30...40° elevation would require ceiling speakers - if the speaker placement was really flexible, you could place the height speakers above the front speakers, which in this case might be only 20° elevation.

Which leads to another question: Is it possible to measure the imaging accuracy of a format or a speaker layout? Meaning: How precisely can an audio object be localized anywhere on the hemisphere, and how much does that location deviate from the intended location, depending on the listening position? And is such accurate localization even intended by the formats in question? For movies this may not be important, but gamers will want to have good localization. There should be test signals with audio objects at defined locations so you can check your system's performance in this regard. Scientists have done such tests for which they use lab setups and laser pointers (and one of their findings was that phantom imaging / panning works much worse in vertical direction than in horizontal direction, which actually is an argument for more speakers ;)).
 
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
ATI/Theta/CAT speaker layout with 22 channels. That one is probably one of the better one's :D
 
jliedeka

jliedeka

Audioholic General
I think every square inch of my walls and ceiling should be a transducer. That way I'll have full 180x360 degree coverage.

Jim
 
F

FirstReflection

AV Rant Co-Host
I feel as though this is, perhaps, being overcomplicated.

The simplest solution, it would seem to me, are 5 or 7 speakers as normal, Front Heights, and one more pair of speakers that play double duty as Surround Height/Top Middle speakers.


Let's start with Auro-3D in the home, since that is probably the easiest to understand. On multiple occasions, Wilfried Van Baelen has stated that for the smaller room sizes typically used for home theaters (and I'm talking "smaller room sizes" as compared to a full-sized cinema or auditorium), he feels that a standard 5.1 speaker setup at ear level plus "quadraphonic heights" is the best way to implement the home version of Auro-3D.

So we place our Front L/R, Center, and Surround L/R as normal. Then we place four more speakers at 30 degrees elevation directly above the Front L/R and Surround L/R.

That is quite easy to understand and visualize.

Now, let's go back in time a little bit to look at some of the "expansion" listening modes that were in use before Auro-3D ever hit the market. If we consider Dolby Pro Logic IIz, Audyssey DSX, DTS Neo:X, and Yamaha CinemaDSP, every single one of them made use of "Front Height" speakers.

Now, while the exact placement guidelines for the "Front Height" speakers varied somewhat, all of them gave enough flexibility that the placement demanded by Auro-3D could be used.

So let's really simplify this:

We're going to start with standard 5.1 speaker placement - Front L/R, Center, and Surround L/R.

Now we are going to add one pair of Front Height speakers. We are going to put them directly above the Front L/R speakers at a 30 degree elevation.

Boom. We just created a 7 speaker layout that is compatible with every immersive audio format (including Dolby Atmos, which I purposely haven't mentioned yet) AND every "expansion" format.

So the Front Height speakers are the most universally accepted speaker positions beyond standard 5.1.

So there's our starting point for everything beyond 5.1. Add a pair of Front Height speakers and you're basically in compliance with every immersive or "expansion" listening mode.

"What about the Surround Back speakers?", you ask.

They are optional in all of these formats. So let's not even really worry about them. You want Surround Back speakers? Go ahead and add them. They work with everything. Don't want to add Surround Back speakers? No worries. Not a single format actually demands them. So Surround Back speakers are optional. Don't even worry about them.

So where do we go next to keep things simple?

One option is to add Front Wide speakers. On a personal note, I am a fan of Front Wide speakers. But the simple fact is that they aren't really widely (pun intended) supported.

Actual Dolby Atmos soundtracks can make use of Front Wide speakers, but only if an audio object happens to be placed near that speaker location. The instances of a Front Wide speaker making any sound during a Dolby Atmos soundtrack could easily be very few and far between.

One would assume that actual DTS:X soundtracks might also be able to make use of Front Wide speakers. But again, only if an audio object is actually placed there in the mix.

Auro-3D does not use Front Wide speakers.

So then it's down to the "expansion" and upmixing listening modes. Audyssey DSX and DTS Neo:X make use of Front Wide speakers, but nothing else does; not even the Dolby Surround Upmixer.

So as much as it pains me to say it on a personal level due to my own preference, it simply doesn't make a whole lot of sense to prioritize Front Wide speakers.

So after all of that reasoning, we basically have two more speakers to position somewhere in the room. We start with standard 5.1, we add a pair of Front Height speakers. Now we are going to expand to 9 speakers total. Or, of we've decided to make use of the optional Surround Back positions, we are going to expand to 11 speakers total.

And here's the only place where we need to make a compromise.

Back at the beginning of this post, I started with Auro-3D. If you want to adhere to Auro-3D, then you are going to position these last two speakers directly above the Surround L/R speakers at a 30 degree elevation to create Surround Height channels.

Now, Dolby's speaker placement guidelines for Atmos at home are well laid out in their Installation Guide: http://www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-home-theater-installation-guidelines.pdf

But that's way more complicated than it needs to be. All we really need to do is to look and see if there are a pair of speakers anywhere in those Dolby Atmos guidelines that almost line up perfectly with the Auro-3D Surround Height speaker positions.

And there are! The "Top Middle" speakers in a Dolby Atmos setup go directly above the Surround L/R speakers, they just happen to be spread apart the same distance as the Front L/R speakers, which means they would typically end up somewhere on the ceiling.

So now we have a simple choice - if we think we will be listening to more Auro-3D content than Dolby Atmos content - or if we prefer the Auromatic Upmixer to the Dolby Surround Upmixer - then we will adhere to the Auro-3D speaker placement and put these last two speakers directly above our Surround L/R speakers at a 30 degree elevation. Auro-3D and Auromatic content will now be heard exactly as intended. And Atmos and Dolby Surround content will be slightly compromised, but not drastically. The Front Height speakers are an entirely supported speaker position, and we will simply tell our AV Receiver or Processor that our second pair of "Height" speakers for Atmos and DSU are "Top Middle" speakers. They just happen to be a little bit farther apart than what is laid out in the Atmos Installation Guide. But it's a fairly small compromise, to be honest.

On the other hand, if we will be listening to more Dolby Atmos content than Auro-3D content - or if we prefer the Dolby Surround Upmixer to the Auromatic upmixer - we will make sure that these last two speakers go directly above the Surround L/R speakers, but they are the same distance apart from one another as our Front L/R speakers. And that distance apart will most likely mean that these Top Middle speakers end up on the ceiling. For Auro-3D and Auromatic content, the Surround Height information will be slightly compromised. But again, really not that much.

And, of course, we could always split the difference and have these Top Middle/Surround Height speakers be a little wider apart than what Dolby would call for, but a little more overhead and closer together than what Auro would call for. So a slight compromise for both, but not a large compromise for either.



And that's it!

So to summarize:

- Start with standard 5.1

- Add a pair of Front Height speakers directly above the Front L/R speakers at a 30 degree elevation

- Add Surround Back speakers if you want - or don't. They're optional.

- Add a pair of speakers directly above the Surround L/R speakers that will act as Surround Heights for Auro-3D and Auromatic, as well as Top Middle speakers for Dolby Atmos and Dolby Surround Upmixer. Put them at exactly 30 degrees elevation if you strongly favor Auro, or put them the same width apart as your Front L/R speakers (which will most likely mean they end up on the ceiling) if you strongly favor Dolby. And if you like Auro and Dolby equally, split the difference for a slight compromise to both formats.




What gets left out with this approach?

- Well, we've left out the Front Wide speakers. But many of the current AV Receivers and Processors allow you to physically connect 13 speakers and then basically select which 11 out of those 13 are ever playing at one time. So you can still have the Front Wide speakers physically in place, and then only ever make use of them by selecting either Audyssey DSX or DTS Neo:X as your listening mode.

- The "Rear Presence" speakers for Yamaha CinemaDSP are also left out. But that is literally only one brand that ever uses that listening mode.

- The "voice of God" speaker is left out. But Wilfried himself has said that it's the least important speaker by quite a large margin.

- Dolby Enabled Upward-firing speakers or Modules. They only work for Atmos and DSU, so there's no way they can ever be "universal". Dolby Enabled speakers or Modules only make sense if you're only ever going to use Atmos and DSU, and you're never going to use any of the other immersive audio or expansion or upmixing listening modes.


Lastly, we don't know for 100% sure that DTS:X will work perfectly with all of this. But given their close relationship with Auro, and the fact that they have consistently promoted being a more speaker placement agnostic format, I find it very difficult to believe that DTS:X will not be able to make use of Front Height speakers, or that something akin to either the Surround Height or Top Middle positions will not be an option.


So there you have it: my simple solution for a "universal" speaker placement layout. 5 or 7 speakers as normal, Front Heights, and Surround Heights/Top Middle speakers.

- Rob H.
 
Last edited:
Cos

Cos

Audioholic Samurai
I am afraid that by the time I make a decision on which way to arrange my speakers, a new sound format will come out and require met to change/add yet again! :eek:

Thanks to delays with my home rehab, I still haven't started my HT man cave, though my basement is finally gutted. I may finally be able to break open the boxes of the gear I bought for it lol.

I originally was going to go 7.1.4 with the GE Invisa HTR 7000 as my ceiling speakers. I heard a demo room with all GE at The Little Guys in Mokena IL when Sandy was there and was impressed. Then I looked at the demos for DTS:X and I am like WTF, how am I supposed to set up according to this diagram. I don't see Auro-3D as having any longevity as a sound format, so that I am not even taking that into consideration. It may be the best sound format, but it has about as much chance for success as a 5 year trying to push a 2 ton boulder up a steep hill.

In the end I am going to wait until there is more information on DTS:X for me to figure out the best speaker configuration for my HT Room. I am fortunate in that I am working with a blank canvas with the remodel. If I already had a room setup I probably would just stick with 7.2 and tweak it as best I can.

Out of all the options I would NOT do the reflection speakers.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top