DTS:X Immersive 3D Surround Sound For ALL Consumers!

[THXguru]

Question: What about existing/future Atmos content and production tools?

In the current 5.1 world, most components in the production/distribution chain are generic (mixing desks and tools based on ITU 5.1 standard, DCP files for cinema playback, "regular" loudspeakers in cinema and home). There was not much to earn for Dolby or DTS/datasat in this generic chain, and for BluRay the studios could freely choose to use Dolby or DTS or even PCM to deliver the 5.1 track.

With Atmos, Auro3D and probably also with DTS:X we are leaving this generic, ITU-standard-based world and enter the land of proprietary formats. For instance, I have the impression that with Atmos, Dolby has tried to push as many proprietary components into the chain as possible: Atmos mixing tools, Atmos encoding and transmission to the cinema, Atmos cinema decoder, Atoms/TrueHD encoding and transmission via BluRay, Atmos-enabled upfiring speakers, Atmos AVR signal processing for the upfiring speakers.

I suspect that existing and future Atmos content is "locked/encrypted" in Atmos format, and Dolby will certainly not allow conversion to DTS:X or Auro3D. Same for the existing production tools in the studio: I assume that those only output Atmos data, meaning that some new studio equipment is necessary to make content for DTS:X (or for datasat:X ...?). At home, they can't prevent the user from feeding Atmos-enabled upfiring speakers with non-Atmos signals, but the related signal processing in the AVR is licensed from Dolby and may only be activated with Atmos input signals.

On top of that we have of course fundamental compatibility issues (supported speaker layouts, number of beds and objects, properties and degrees-of-freedom of objects, etc.). So we might face an unprecedented format war with encryption barriers as well as technical (non-compatible content) barriers. Both the content creators and the end user have to decide which format to use and are probably stuck with that format. This is a bad situation, format co-existence as we know it is probably not possible. Studios and even the enthusiasts in this forum are reluctant to move forward in any direction.

My conclusion: In order to get 3D-sound generally embraced, one of the competing formats has to win the race very soon, or the formats have to allow for compatibility and format conversion (maybe based on new ITU or MPEG standards which are already under preparation).
Correct?

 

[RichB]

From the outside, it does look like Dolby is trying to lock down the chain.
DTS is pushing open source content creation tools. If they succeed, then Dolby will fail and there is nothing stopping DTX-MDA from using the Dolby layout even if Dolby does not reciprocate.

Is there a sigh of relief that DTS:X has been announced?

- Rich

 

[THXguru]

Let's see how that "open source" claim works out. Is the format itself open as e.g. Linux is, with "crowd" development? That's hardly possible, there needs to be a well-defined format with consistency and quality control, which delivers reliable performance in professional and home environments. Or is the format fixed, but its specifications available to the public, along with a public license to build encoders, decoders and other tools? That seems nice, but still the question of quality control and proof of format conformity is open, some central entity (probably DTS) has to ensure that, and this work has to be paid by someone, probably the tool developer. This gives DTS control over who is developing/selling what kind of product - not my idea of "open source". Another alternative are standards such as MPEG, which of course are subject to conformity tests and royalty payments, too. In the end, I don't believe that there can be a really "open" 3D-sound standard or format, since this is not the IT world where users or admins have complex installation and maintenance tasks and where MS or others send patches and updates on a weekly basis.

Another issue: Where is the DTS:X content actually coming from, if we consider the film industry? DTS has sold its cinema/professional division to datasat, and datasat collaborates with Barco, who is the partner and distributor of Auro3D. Is datasat going to promote both Auro3D and DTS:X to its studio customers? Hard to imagine, the studios want exactly 1 relevant format. Will Auro3D and DTS:X be (re-)specified to be compatible or even identical? The Auro guys have started to talk about object-audio but still their main claim is the 3D soundfield which requires fixed speaker locations and feeds, while DTS:X is all about objects and scalability. Is DTS reaching out to the professional market again, becoming a competitor to its own former professional division? Could be, datasat seems to focus on their Auro3D cinema processor and also on audio for 35mm film, so there is no technological link to consumer-DTS. That doesn't make it easier to conquer the studio market, and explain to those customers that there used to be professional DTS, which has become datasat, and now there's a new and different DTS which competes with datasat...

Next question: cinema installations. Atmos has obviously quite a headstart there, probably for a large part based on massive sponsoring by Dolby. I don't think DTS has the means to repeat this sponsoring effort. I am however curious whether the Atmos cinema installations (amps, speakers) can be connected to a DTS:X decoder so that both formats can be played (if Dolby didn't prohibit that contractually). But even if that works, moviegoers and cinema owners, as well as home consumers, have to be convinced that they need yet another 3D-sound format. Too much choice can bring confusion and dilution of the whole 3D-sound proposition, that's why I am hesitant to whole-heartedly welcome DTS:X. One well-known, appreciated and prevalent sound format (whichever it may be), even if proprietary and imperfect, is better than having a bunch of irrelevant formats of which none is strong enough to achieve the necessary wide acceptance of 3D-sound.

 

[THXguru]

I also recommend the "Surround sound discussion group" on LinkedIn for this topic (the forum doesn't let me post the link...)

I had read but then forgotten that Barco has aquired Iosono, which was spun off of Fraunhofer IDMT, the MP3 inventors and pioneers of wave field synthesis and object-oriented audio production (audio objects since 1996!). That could mean that Auro3D, maybe under a new name, will indeed become a fully hybrid object/channel format like Atmos is. Nice to see a bunch of interesting audio players (DTS/datasat, Auro3D, SRS, Fraunhofer/Iosono) gravitating towards one new entity, hopefully the result will be at least the sum of all these partners. This is also nice because if Atmos and DTS:X (or however the hybrid format will be called) are more alike, they can more easily be made compatible. That is, if both parties agree... MPEG-H goes in the same direction, too, maybe that is our hope for a common basis which makes everything compatible and successful, instead of exclusive and divided.

DTS says: We don't need height speakers, we can render them. Well, they can indeed, sort of, having acquired SRS with their spaciousness-clarity-elevation algorithms (and even before that they had similar algorithms themselves). Still, those are only algorithms which can do only so much, play some tricks on our psychoacoustics, but if your head shape differs from the average or if your speakers aren't positioned ideally, or if your room creates strong reflections, the effect is probably very weak. Atmos home AVRs contain similar filtering (maybe a bit simpler than SRS), but with the Atmos-enabled upfiring speakers there are at least some real acoustics going on, and even that is a weak replacement for real ceiling speakers, as Gene and Theo and others have reported. I'll give the benefit of doubt to DTS that they can create a virtual-height solution with good performance and robustness from the SRS legacy and their own repository. But I don't believe they can make ceiling speakers redundant.

 

[RichB]

Dolby is promoting a proprietary format and tools.
The industry might look favorably on an toolset that is "Open" in that it can be used to mix any format for distribution: Auro3D, DTS:X, DTS-MA, Atmos,
If DTS can provide a toolset that is easy to use and cost effective, then they can make inroads into content creation.

It makes sense for Barco and DTS to cooperate and push open standards which is not the same as Open source software product. If this is the case, then AVID could include DTS:X in ProTools without paying a royalty.

- Rich

 

[andyblackcat]

I have an idea. A slimline AVP with 8 channel input so the current AVR/AVP 7.1 can be patched into the slimline atmos 7.1.4 -34ch / dtsX / dts MA at cheap affordable I think £150.00 is the fair price. Considering its going to cost consumers a bundle on cables (active crossovers if used) amplifiers and speakers and brackets to fit speakers up and speaker cables. Its about time manufacturers put aside their greed and get real and fair with consumers.

The slimline can have multiple HDMI inputs for allowing bluray player Dolby TrueHD 7.1.1.4 or 34 atmos bitstream channels though multi-D-25 outputs with provided cables D-25 XLR / D-25 RCA phone so it can cater for anyone needs.

I recall owning a Cambridge audio Dolby digital AC-3 AVP around late 90's that only cost S/H under £100.00 and new I think would have been around £250.00?

 

[andyblackcat]

2 days left of March and I'm yawning at dtsX now. They promised more info by March.

 

[RichB]

- Rich

 

[andyblackcat]

30th March in 4 hours. I think dtsX doesn't have better format coming with

Stage channels
Upper LCR
Middle LCR
Below LCR

Surrounds
left upper corner 4 channels of surrounds
left middle wall 4 channels of surrounds
left lower corner 4 channels of surrounds

Surrounds
right upper corner 47 channels of surrounds
right middle wall 4 channels of surrounds
right lower corner 4 channels of surrounds

Surrounds back wall
left upper corner 2 channels of surrounds
left middle wall 2 channels of surrounds
left lower corner 2 channels of surrounds

Surrounds back wall
right upper corner 2 channels of surrounds
right middle wall 2 channels of surrounds
right lower corner 2 channels of surrounds

Overhead surrounds
left overhead 4 channels
right overhead 4 channels

Below surround (for underneath real cinema seats in the home)
4 channels left below underneath
4 channels right below underneath

LFE.2 front stage
LFE.2 back of home cinema

65 channels and make it so for £150.00 top model AVR yes £150.00 with lots of D-25 connectors on the back with Free leads D-25 to XLR / D-25 to RCA for keeping consumer happy. £150.00 is reasonable as these $2.5 grand AVR only end up as junk on eBay, in less then 10 years.

I bet 1pence, dtsX won't be able to deliver the above.

 

[Grassy]

I voted "none" as the sound i am getting now is the best i have ever had, Just waiting on my Audyssey pro kit to be delivered and then hopefully step it up a notch but i am not expecting a huge difference as my acoustics in my room are about right on the money for my liking.My room has a lot going for it, so half the battle is already won, but i will be paying close attention to the hype out of curiosity.

 

[RichB]

The DTS:X announcement is April 9'th:

http://www.bigpicturebigsound.com/DTS-X-Details-to-be-Unveiled-April-9th.shtml

http://www.twice.com/news/audio/more-dtsx-details-be-revealed-april-9/56575

- Rich

 

[Cos]

I am an owner of a new AV8802, so it is supposed to be a firmware upgrade, we shall see I am going to try it out in my new HT setup

 

[andyblackcat]

I'd sooner buy £2.5 grand worth of cat food than waste of air space Atmos auro dtsX for a paperweight AVR.

A cat is for life. dtsX auro, Atmos isn't.

 

[gene]

DTS just sent me an invite to their April 9th press event and unveiling of DTS:X for the home cinema market. We will be covering this so don't count them out just yet.

 

[RichB]

I'd sooner buy £2.5 grand worth of cat food than waste of air space Atmos auro dtsX for a paperweight AVR.

A cat is for life. dtsX auro, Atmos isn't.

Do you really dislike links to information about the DTS:X announcement?

- Rich

 

[andyblackcat]

Do you really dislike links to information about the DTS:X announcement?

- Rich

Yes I do the links are dodgy. Copy paste the text here with wrapped Quote.

 

[andyblackcat]

DTS just sent me an invite to their April 9th press event and unveiling of DTS:X for the home cinema market. We will be covering this so don't count them out just yet.

Gene, take lots of pictures many angles of the room and more important VIDEO! At least 15 mins video.

 

[Cos]

I'd sooner buy £2.5 grand worth of cat food than waste of air space Atmos auro dtsX for a paperweight AVR.

A cat is for life. dtsX auro, Atmos isn't.

That's a lot of cat food, and where do you get a cat that lives for 85 years I need a cat for life

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, you shared yours now I will share mine. I have heard a demo of the Atmos Room at The Little Guys in Mokena IL, I have also heard it when I was in Vegas, I was impressed. having actually heard it, and given the fact I am building my HT from scratch, I thought why not. Another 1k in Speakers and a Pre/Pro I was going to get regardless, didn't seem like to much of an expense. I needed a new pre/pro for 4k and the AV8802 has HDCP 2.2 as a free upgrade, so I made the plunge. I am interested in DTS:X so I have the luxury to try it out.

I definitely wouldn't call my Pre/Pro a paperweight, it has a few features and besides the sound formats that work pretty well. LOL

Thought the dislike on Rich was a little inappropriate, I like Links!

 

[RichB]

Yes I do the links are dodgy. Copy paste the text here with wrapped Quote.

Quotes are helpful but links are good form since the publisher deserves the traffic

- Rich

 

[andyblackcat]

That's a lot of cat food, and where do you get a cat that lives for 85 years I need a cat for life

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, you shared yours now I will share mine. I have heard a demo of the Atmos Room at The Little Guys in Mokena IL, I have also heard it when I was in Vegas, I was impressed. having actually heard it, and given the fact I am building my HT from scratch, I thought why not. Another 1k in Speakers and a Pre/Pro I was going to get regardless, didn't seem like to much of an expense. I needed a new pre/pro for 4k and the AV8802 has HDCP 2.2 as a free upgrade, so I made the plunge. I am interested in DTS:X so I have the luxury to try it out.

I definitely wouldn't call my Pre/Pro a paperweight, it has a few features and besides the sound formats that work pretty well. LOL

Thought the dislike on Rich was a little inappropriate, but to each their own.

Well the links showed up dodgy "warning!" and clicked off them.

Also have listened to Atmos, first hand twice. Empire Leicester Square, Star Trek Into Darkness, 9th May 2013. I didn't like Atmos it was way too loud I had to cover my ears way too many times. The mix on that film is appalling same issue in the home the levels often go close to OVER its got lousy dialogue that that seemed too soft when the black starship attacking the Enterprise, and captain Kirk, voice sounded wimpy when rasiing his voice and rasing centre channel won't help it will only make maters worse with sound effects panning or some dialogue pans not sounding smooth from L to C to R. My opinion.