Will Atmos/DTS: X become as standard as 7.1?

[yepimonfire]

Back when 7.1 movies started coming out on bluray, a lot of people believed it wouldn't really stick, and not a lot of movies were mixed in 7.1, however, I'd say 90% of action movies are released in 7.1 nowadays. Object based audio is still relatively new, and even more new in the home theater market, but I don't see why it couldn't eventually manage to become standard. A majority of blurays are encoded in DTS HD-MA, and DTS: X's software is 100% free for those who already have DTS mixing software. With the amount of options consumers have for object based audio (dolby enabled speakers, including sound bars and HTiB systems), I don't see why it wouldn't gain more traction.

What do you think?

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[j_garcia]

Most home theaters still aren't even 7.1 I am going to wager, as in Average Joe. Going to friend's homes, they are mostly soundbar/small/2.1 or 2.0 setups still, with the exception of my AH type friends. So while Atmos and DTS-X are already here and will most certainly become the "standard" for theaters IMO, they will not become the default at home.

 

[Hetfield]

I have absolutely no interest in moving up to 7.1 or 7.2 let alone Atmos or DTS-X. I did the 7 channel thing when it first came out and to me it's just overkill unless you have a big enough room and the right space. Atmos and DTS-X I have no interest in. I'm not hanging speakers all over the dam house, now from the ceiling too? I mean give me a break. I'll stick with 5.2 and have more money to spend on them than for 7 or 9 or 12 channels or whenever they come up with next.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[2channel lover]

Even though I expect to run at least 2 Atmos speakers, I tend to agree with Hetfield in many ways.

My HT space is in an ideal spot to run atmos speakers...a flat 9' ceiling loft space with attic above. My plan is a for 5.2.2 system and most likely that will be it. If I didn't have an ideal location for atmos I'm quite certain I wouldn't even consider it.

Unless you've planned for 5.1 (much less 7.1) when you built your home, a lot of people just don't want to go through the hassle of dealing with surround speakers.

 

[shadyJ]

Atmos and DTS:X should become standard. There is absolutely no reason why they wouldn't. Again, in this thread we see the misconception that they are just ceiling channel speakers, which is untrue. They are a new type of sound mix. They can accommodate ceiling channel speakers, or front wides, or many other configurations. It is one sound mix that can accommodate many types of speaker configurations without being down mixed or up mixed. It can do 5.1 just as easily as 32.1, the only limitation is your hardware.

 

[yepimonfire]

I have absolutely no interest in moving up to 7.1 or 7.2 let alone Atmos or DTS-X. I did the 7 channel thing when it first came out and to me it's just overkill unless you have a big enough room and the right space. Atmos and DTS-X I have no interest in. I'm not hanging speakers all over the dam house, now from the ceiling too? I mean give me a break. I'll stick with 5.2 and have more money to spend on them than for 7 or 9 or 12 channels or whenever they come up with next.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Have you listened to atmos? I agree, rear surrounds are really accessory speakers and don't add a whole lot to the experience, but atmos is like going from the old dolby surround / prologic to discrete 5.1.

Obviously placing speakers above you is a bit of a pain in the ass, but there's plenty of solutions besides just in ceiling speakers. Svs elevation speakers, which can be wall mounted, Polk OWM3/5, which can be attached to the ceiling with nothing more that a couple screws or even those damage free picture hangers, and omnimount type mounts can be attached to the ceiling. Finding room for height speakers should be easier than finding room for surrounds, as the ceiling is out of the way. Most AVR's will even support 2.1.2 or 3.1.2 as well for those who don't have space for much more than a sound bar type system.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Hetfield]

Have you listened to atmos? I agree, rear surrounds are really accessory speakers and don't add a whole lot to the experience, but atmos is like going from the old dolby surround / prologic to discrete 5.1.

Obviously placing speakers above you is a bit of a pain in the ass, but there's plenty of solutions besides just in ceiling speakers. Svs elevation speakers, which can be wall mounted, Polk OWM3/5, which can be attached to the ceiling with nothing more that a couple screws or even those damage free picture hangers, and omnimount type mounts can be attached to the ceiling. Finding room for height speakers should be easier than finding room for surrounds, as the ceiling is out of the way. Most AVR's will even support 2.1.2 or 3.1.2 as well for those who don't have space for much more than a sound bar type system.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

I have no interest in it. Then you have to find movies or Blu-ray movies with it encoded. I do not like having the fake sound when it isn't encoded so it'll be useless to me unless it's actually on the Blu-ray. Also now you have wires going up the wall or in the wall. Like I said I have absolutely no interest in it at all. I think it's just one more ploy to get people to buy newer receivers, more speakers and equipment. Next it'll be more speakers above your actual listening position. I mean where does this end? I'm glad problem like it, and have gone out and changed over this, helped the economy a bit but it ain't for me.
I do agree though the SVS prime elevation speakers look pretty awesome. I want to buy a pair just to check them out.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[yepimonfire]

I have no interest in it. Then you have to find movies or Blu-ray movies with it encoded. I do not like having the fake sound when it isn't encoded so it'll be useless to me unless it's actually on the Blu-ray. Also now you have wires going up the wall or in the wall. Like I said I have absolutely no interest in it at all. I think it's just one more ploy to get people to buy newer receivers, more speakers and equipment. Next it'll be more speakers above your actual listening position. I mean where does this end? I'm glad problem like it, and have gone out and changed over this, helped the economy a bit but it ain't for me.
I do agree though the SVS prime elevation speakers look pretty awesome. I want to buy a pair just to check them out.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Check out my blog in the link below reviewing the upmixers for DTS X and Atmos, they work extremely well. If you're truly not interested, okay, but it's definitely worth it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Hetfield]

Check out my blog in the link below reviewing the upmixers for DTS X and Atmos, they work extremely well. If you're truly not interested, okay, but it's definitely worth it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

Yeah I'll check it out but I still just don't want speakers hanging from the ceiling.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[panteragstk]

Yeah I'll check it out but I still just don't want speakers hanging from the ceiling.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I've read many reports that Atmos and DTS X can sound superior to the DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD counterparts. The speaker layout was 5.1 so even though you don't have more speakers, you could potentially benefit from the new mixing method/codec.

 

[Hetfield]

I've read many reports that Atmos and DTS X can sound superior to the DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD counterparts. The speaker layout was 5.1 so even though you don't have more speakers, you could potentially benefit from the new mixing method/codec.

Ok never heard that before. I am curious as to how or why a 5.1 or 5.2 system might sound better with an Atmos or DTS-X mix though. Interesting info, thanks.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[2channel lover]

Atmos and DTS:X should become standard. There is absolutely no reason why they wouldn't. Again, in this thread we see the misconception that they are just ceiling channel speakers, which is untrue. They are a new type of sound mix. They can accommodate ceiling channel speakers, or front wides, or many other configurations. It is one sound mix that can accommodate many types of speaker configurations without being down mixed or up mixed. It can do 5.1 just as easily as 32.1, the only limitation is your hardware.

In terms of sound reproduction in a movie...I agree it probably should become the standard, it adds more realism to the video. For the new build dedicated HT space it probably will be the standard for home owners.

Will it become the standard for apartment dwellers, or homeowners that don't have dedicated HT rooms to put atmos speakers? I'm not sure if it will. Whether it's atmos floor speakers or ceiling speakers, it creates enough of a challenge to execute that the average joe is not going to go through. I think it will be an enthusiast niche in terms of home theater installs.

 

[2channel lover]

Ok never heard that before. I am curious as to how or why a 5.1 or 5.2 system might sound better with an Atmos or DTS-X mix though. Interesting info, thanks.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

I've heard an atmos demo at a retailer. It does add a realistic sound element to a movie where it's applicable.

As I mentioned in a prior post. I'm doing a new music/HT component build. The space is not your typical 4 walls and door type space, but it does have easy access for in ceiling speakers. If that wasn't the case I most likely would not be making the effort.

 

[shadyJ]

Will it become the standard for apartment dwellers, or homeowners that don't have dedicated HT rooms to put atmos speakers? I'm not sure if it will. Whether it's atmos floor speakers or ceiling speakers, it creates enough of a challenge to execute that the average joe is not going to go through. I think it will be an enthusiast niche in terms of home theater installs.

Again, you are still thinking of object oriented mixes in terms of extra speakers. That is not what they are about, that is just something they can do. They are about having a single sound mix that can scale to any size system, and that has a lot more flexibility than conventional sound mixes.

All of the different sounds are now discrete instead of being mixed down to a single track that is sent to a channel for a speaker. So yo can do so much more now. For example, lets say you wanted to boost the dialogue alone on the center channel but without boosting all the other sounds that gets sent to the center channel. Well, you can just boost all sounds labeled with the metadata tag 'dialogue' by 3 dB or whatever you want, and now you have made the dialogue louder and nothing else. That will help boost dialogue off the center channel track as well. That is just the tip of the iceberg as far as object oriented capability goes. It really frees up the sound engineer to make better sound mixes.

 

[2channel lover]

Again, you are still thinking of object oriented mixes in terms of extra speakers. That is not what they are about, that is just something they can do. They are about having a single sound mix that can scale to any size system, and that has a lot more flexibility than conventional sound mixes.

All of the different sounds are now discrete instead of being mixed down to a single track that is sent to a channel for a speaker. So yo can do so much more now. For example, lets say you wanted to boost the dialogue alone on the center channel but without boosting all the other sounds that gets sent to the center channel. Well, you can just boost all sounds labeled with the metadata tag 'dialogue' by 3 dB or whatever you want, and now you have made the dialogue louder and nothing else. That will help boost dialogue off the center channel track as well. That is just the tip of the iceberg as far as object oriented capability goes. It really frees up the sound engineer to make better sound mixes.

Fair point...I am grounded in additional hardware. If it can be accomplished w/o additional speakers...there's no reason it won't become the standard.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

I've read many reports that Atmos and DTS X can sound superior to the DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD counterparts. The speaker layout was 5.1 so even though you don't have more speakers, you could potentially benefit from the new mixing method/codec.

I don't t have the tech description for this either, but my system has benefited from atmos mixes. The imaging etc is much more defined and just better overall. I'm in the planning phase of a retro fit atmos install at home. It's son much more than just extra speakers. Probably won't be standard as in most people won't do it. But who cares? For the ones that do, it'll be worth it.

 

[yepimonfire]

I've read many reports that Atmos and DTS X can sound superior to the DTS-HD MA and Dolby TrueHD counterparts. The speaker layout was 5.1 so even though you don't have more speakers, you could potentially benefit from the new mixing method/codec.

That's true, as I've tested it myself. I believe atmos requires 7.1 minimum.

Sent from my 5065N using Tapatalk

 

[Gunny]

That's true, as I've tested it myself. I believe atmos requires 7.1 minimum.

Sent from my 5065N using Tapatalk

The minimum is 5.1.2 but Dolby recommends four [5.1.4] height speakers. I've listened to a few Atmos encoded Blu-Ray's and even with no height channels the difference is amazing.

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/brands/dolby-atmos.html

 

[yepimonfire]

The minimum is 5.1.2 but Dolby recommends four [5.1.4] height speakers. I've listened to a few Atmos encoded Blu-Ray's and even with no height channels the difference is amazing.

https://www.dolby.com/us/en/brands/dolby-atmos.html

I mean atmos processing won't work with 5.1, but it will with 7.1, at least on my receiver. DTS x seems to adapt to different layouts better than atmos, with 5.1.2, I swear I hear rear channels all the time, since DTS x and neural x renders rear channels as a phantom image with the appropriate phase delay through the surrounds.

Sent from my 5065N using Tapatalk

 

[Tankman]

I have absolutely no interest in moving up to 7.1 or 7.2 let alone Atmos or DTS-X. I did the 7 channel thing when it first came out and to me it's just overkill unless you have a big enough room and the right space. Atmos and DTS-X I have no interest in. I'm not hanging speakers all over the dam house, now from the ceiling too? I mean give me a break. I'll stick with 5.2 and have more money to spend on them than for 7 or 9 or 12 channels or whenever they come up with next.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

You made a lot of good points here. As much as I love a really great surround mix just as much as the n next guy. Where I live now my living room isn't that big and it's space so to speak gives me a hard work around also plus it's a apartment. 7.1 7.2. 9.1 9.2 11.1 11.2 and now Dolby Atmos and DTS X added into the mix. In my set up of 5.1 about all I can do would be to add two height speakers above my L/R mains and one more Sub. But than I am sure they would run me out of here the other apartment dwellers that is. But I will say if and when I do move to a better place aka owe home I would do 7.2 or 9.2 I have heard those two set-ups and it blows 5.1 out the water. So umm Atmos yeah I believe that will be the new recording mix standard for blu ray. DVD comes mostly 5.1 at lease the regular ones I have you would be lucky to find one with TrueHD or Master HD.

Mike