The Dolby Atmos, DTS-X, and Auro-3D Discussion Thread

AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I actually thought that 2 ceiling speakers was excellent enough for Atmos effects in my 22 x 2 6 x 14 room. But having 4 ceiling speakers just feels right. :D

Having just one ceiling speaker (as prescribed by Auro-3D) just feels wrong. :D It better be one awesome big ceiling speaker!
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Warlord
I actually thought that 2 ceiling speakers was excellent enough for Atmos effects in my 22 x 2 6 x 14 room. But having 4 ceiling speakers just feels right. :D

Having just one ceiling speaker (as prescribed by Auro-3D) just feels wrong. :D It better be one awesome big ceiling speaker!
Late to the party, but I do think it's interesting that you changed your mind from "5.1 is all you need". Funny how stuff like that happens?

There are quite a few good Atmos mixes out there as others have posted. It makes movies "new" again if done right.

I've got The 5th Element with an Atmos mix. It's pretty cool, but I've seen that movie so many times it's hard to tell how "new" it feels.
 
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
Hmm, guess I have been away/not really paying attention. Not sure how I missed this. I'm running a combo HT room for all 3 including the VOG channel for Auro. I agree with some of ShadyJ's sentiment regarding being disappointed with where the codecs have been taken. I think some movies have been ok, few have been awesome, many have been a touch on the disappointing side. I have, however, been pleasantly surprised by the upmixing. My only gripe is that the iteration of Auro that we are given in something like a Marantz 8802A doesn't allow for the rear surrounds to be in use and also canabalizes the second subwoofer output for the VOG. Other than that, I still think Auro has the superior upmixing software compared to DTS and Dolby.

Overall, I look forward to the possibilities and with Emotiva's (eventual) 24 channel monster coming out, I'm curious to see where the big companies can take things and if they'll rise to meet the challenge, or maybe this will be another promising thing that will flounder.
 
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
With the upgrade modules it'll be 24 channels. The extra channels above 16 will be completely assignable (so they say), meaning all of them could be sub channels if you really wanted. Heck, maybe they'll make the current array assignable as well.
Although I don’t ever see myself buying any Emotiva, I am very impressed, at least with their goals/intentions on this AVP.

It seems similar to the $20,000 Theta Digital Casablanca, sans the awesome aesthetics. :D

Some rich bastards must have a very large room to accommodate 24CH. :D
 
S

snakeeyes

Audioholic Ninja
With the upgrade modules it'll be 24 channels. The extra channels above 16 will be completely assignable (so they say), meaning all of them could be sub channels if you really wanted. Heck, maybe they'll make the current array assignable as well.
2.22 ? :)
 
Bookmark

Bookmark

Full Audioholic
I am not even allowed one most of the time :( Fury and the A Team put paid to the sub getting free reign. Until of course they go on Hols :D
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
One thing I want to add is something I have said before, that one of the nifty things about an object-oriented sound mix is it can easily be scalable in that one sound mix should be able to accommodate a 2 speaker system just as easily as a 200 speaker system, since there really shouldn't be any 'bed' tracks. All sound streams should be objects. So the promise of an object-oriented sound mix is that you only need that one mix that can optimally handle any kind of system, any kind of configuration. Atmos did not do this. Atmos has a bed 7 channel layer is that is mixed much like any other sound mix, so now you need a surround sound system at the least to reproduce these mixes. That kills a lot of the flexibility that an object oriented sound mix can have right out of the gate.

Furthermore, the way it has been marketed has been just awful, and has realized the worst of Gene's predictions for this technology. All it has been sold as to the public is "look! sound from above!" It is being sold as a gimmick. It's lucky that it isn't a dead technology already. It is just a way to sell more speakers and more expensive AVRs for manufacturers. The kind of systems that Dolby wants are unwieldly for most people anyway. Like Gene said, how many badly setup 5.1 systems have you seen? If most people can't even setup their basic 5.1 surround sound system right, what are the odds that they are going to setup a 7.1.4 system correctly?

The real shame of this was that a possibility of object-oriented sound systems to actually optimize non-ideal speaker placement, ie., most people's system. Instead of demanding a system that few people can setup correctly, a good object-oriented sound mix can make the best of a system that is imperfectly arranged.

But nope, thanks to blundering greedy manufacturers and sound engineering companies, now all it is good for is height channels, which at its best could only be marginally better than a decent 7.1 system. Like I said, massively wasted potential.
 
Bookmark

Bookmark

Full Audioholic
One approach is throw the baby out with the bathwater. Apple :(
The other is support it well beyond the apparent need. Microsoft :)

Which one dominates the computer industry and has done for 30+ years? There are more that a billion PCs and Apple has less than 5% of that market. Not that you would know if you watch any film or Tv programme. :eek:

Dolby and Dts have a legacy problem that is not going away anytime soon. So whilst it would be great to switch entirely to an object based codec they just cannot. That can only come as a future option. I do not disagree that that is the likely outcome, but until all the old formats are long gone you cannot realistically drop support. Atmos was an addon and while it could have been done as an object system when first released caution got the better of the Dolby, Dts and the studios.

The media content will always take priority over the concept. Availability is key. :)
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
So if ATMOS were only object-based, then it could NOT be played back on non-ATMOS AVR?
 
Bookmark

Bookmark

Full Audioholic
No because the format would be incompatible. Hence True HD is a core for Atmos, Dts HDMA is a core for Dts:X. Dolby is a Core for True HD and Dts is a core for HDMA.

If you want a full object based codec without any legacy overheads then you would still need to include the legacy codecs as a separate audio track for those older systems. It can be done, it just has been so far. Perhaps Atmos 2.0 :)
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
No because the format would be incompatible. Hence True HD is a core for Atmos, Dts HDMA is a core for Dts:X. Dolby is a Core for True HD and Dts is a core for HDMA.

If you want a full object based codec without any legacy overheads then you would still need to include the legacy codecs as a separate audio track for those older systems. It can be done, it just has been so far. Perhaps Atmos 2.0 :)
Agreed, it wouldn't even be that hard to do. Just make the existing channel track mixes into streamed objects.

Maybe in 10 or 20 years the potential of object-oriented sound mixes will be realized by sound engineering labs like Dolby and DTS. It's amazing how far ahead of the curve computer game sound has been (and continues to be) in front of movie sound mixes on this.
 
Bookmark

Bookmark

Full Audioholic
That would be two different things. Decoding/Encoding an existing format to an object based one would be inherently different than starting from scratch with a new codec. The end result further down the processing chain could be the same but it would still need to know and handle what Stereo, Pro Logic, Dolby Digital, Dolby EX, True HD and Atmos were prior to the object conversion.

Datasat and others must do something similar to achieve the 32 flexible speaker layouts already. So it is not like it's technologically impossible, just probably expensive. :cool:

And as shadyJ suggests games developers can already create an Atmos track on the fly, but this is done in a specific way. Which is not how it would need to be done for existing encoded material.
 
D

Drunkpenguin

Audioholic Chief
I worry that home theaters themselves are in jeopardy. let alone atmos. I would bet that most of us in this forum are middle aged or older. The young generations are happier watching content on 5" phone screens. I dont see them growing up and installing massive sound systems in their homes.
 
A

andyblackcat

Audioholic General
1. Which ones have you experienced in both commercial and home setting?
Dolby Atmos at Empire Leicester Square. star trek into darkness Dolby cinema digital, Atmos (JBL/THX) it was so deafeningly loud and off putting I had to cover my ears far too many times.

2. Was the commercial experience better or was the home experience better?
Yes as it was in a large cinema with real audience atmosphere.

3. Which one do you prefer?
Depends on the film mix and its sound delivery format.

4. Do you use Overhead Ceiling speakers or On-wall Height speakers or Add-on-Modules?
Attached to the ceiling.

5. Do you think Four (4) Ceiling/Height/Add-on speakers are better than two (2) ?
Four or more is better.

6. What do you think is the best setup and speaker placements after seeing other systems ?
Well after seeing for decades speakers fitted within the ceiling or attached to the ceiling at few of the local cinemas. Odeon screen 1 and 2, screen 1 had them fitted flush with ceiling around x6 spread evenly above and performed okay with Dolby Stereo (CP50 in both screens) downstairs had the surrounds speakers arranged around the sides rear and flush mounted speakers spread evenly around the ceiling. The cinema is now closed down since early last year. Screen 2 was gutted in late '89 into shoe-boxes the surrounds that was in the ceiling covered up with some wood/plasterboard where the speakers was once visible to the trained eye and listener.
32770571006_4c2f53bbfe_k.jpg32770573636_648e624bda_k.jpg
(found these pictures online)

Screen 1 look closely at ceiling you can see square shapes x6 in all around the circular ceiling. The JBL 8330 was installed around mid 1999 for star wars episode 1 but I think it was up and running when I saw The Matrix in SR-D, the original overhead surrounds last time I heard them working was around late 1997 I think as there was some bookshelf speakers placed in the far corners of the auditorium, that lacked. Talk about cutting corners. Maybe the overhead speakers had some damage of sort and no one was bothered to getting them replaced?

So speakers fitted above the audience is not uncommon to me nor should it be we hear them in shopping centres airports etc as PA public announcements of for ambiance music.

UCI tower park where I learned projection back around 1989 had EV Eletro-Voice speakers EV, three screen (no subs installed even thou essential for SR soundtracks) and overhead surrounds I mean what else can it be called?
UCI 3.jpg UCI 1.jpg
Two of Larger screens Seven of the smaller screens
5 and 6 one and four and seven and ten

A bit uncommon for a cinema to experiment with the surrounds placed on the ceiling and worked fine with Dolby Stereo CP55
Today the cinema has been revamped back around 2009 I think not too sure but looks nothing like how it did back then when seeing Titanic (1997) "3d" thou throw the glasses away and saw it for the 15 or maybe 18th at a cinema since 1998 when I projected it at Warner village cinema 12 plex by hand with a co-worker taking turns to run the film off the cake platter as the PCB board failed to operate the motor for the cake platter, that was brand new.

7. Do your main speakers and subs “Overpower” the Atmos speakers?
I have noticed it and can easily compensate to get audio levels to match the other channels keeping an eye on the level meters.
41545295_10156500305095149_7434816662592815104_n.jpg
End credits of Man of Steel
The decoding of the channels and when listening to only the four height channels by them-self with rest all muted the carries a bass like guitar string thou could be keyboard synth with some higher musical notes.

The side surrounds sounds like some sort of Hawaiian music with choir voices that plays for few moments then lets other bass music notes play then the choir fades back in with that Hawaiian music I mean is this film about Superman or surfboarding?

The back surrounds has deeper musical percussion drums and strings.

The five screen fronts that I use carries a wider bass, with percussion beating away.

When all at present 16 channels playing with the below matrix surrounds it sounds okay.

8. What are some awesome Atmos, DTS-X, or Auro-3D materials for showing off your system?
41685477_10156500180450149_1261596061370155008_n.jpg one of the few affordable Marantz SR6012

So far this pressing has managed to avoid being thrown into (like the bluray was) but that all depends on my state of depression been 4 days now since it arrived.

Not a huge fan of the music score theme its not like Superman the movie (1978) which had a good theme, this is just a load of drums beating away but its nicely assembled in the mixing processes which I guess why the disc has been in the player since Sunday now and its almost Wednesday.

Sound effects 1.33.08 superman punches one of zods girls over the cornfields with truck passing by honking its horn across the five screen left to right then thou the right surround arrays discreetly as the camera pans to left honking passes and fades away as superman and zods' girl smash into a restaurant with LFE.1 accompanying all the action with each super-punch weaponry effects explosions and earth rumbling.

Its not a bad movie its like Superman the movie and Superman II all rolled into one but prefer Christopher Reeve as the man of the steel. Henry Cavill, delivers a fine, Kal-El .

Drone appears as high pitched sound then a bit more above with what was once a $12million dollars of hardware kaboom that thunders deeply then fades away to the openness of the desert.
41515048_10156500392975149_3337635973533007872_n.jpg
Dialogue appearing right centre to left centre then to centre, time stamp is on the picture.

Cool when Superman flies off with thunderous sonic booms.
 
Last edited:
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Last night I watched about 20 minutes of “Gravity” in Atmos in my HT Room.

Wow! Definitely among the best ATMOS soundtracks I’ve heard.

If that’s not even utilizing the full (object-based) potentials of ATMOS, then I can’t wait for someone to create a 100% object-based ATMOS soundtrack!

If I had experienced this ATMOS sound quality when I first saw “Gravity” in ATMOS at the commercial ATMOS theater, I would have fully endorsed ATMOS at the very beginning.

My home ATMOS experience is a 100% improvement over any commercial ATMOS theaters I’ve encountered.

So for anyone wondering what ATMOS is like, please don’t watch it at the commercial ATMOS theaters. Instead, experience ATMOS in a home environment.

If this is an ATMOS disappointment, then we are in for a treat when ATMOS is truly object-based.

Anyway, I can definitely confirm that “Gravity” in ATMOS is top notch.
 
S

shadyJ

Speaker of the House
Staff member
Last night I watched about 20 minutes of “Gravity” in Atmos in my HT Room.

Wow! Definitely among the best ATMOS soundtracks I’ve heard.

If that’s not even utilizing the full (object-based) potentials of ATMOS, then I can’t wait for someone to create a 100% object-based ATMOS soundtrack!

If I had experienced this ATMOS sound quality when I first saw “Gravity” in ATMOS at the commercial ATMOS theater, I would have fully endorsed ATMOS at the very beginning.

My home ATMOS experience is a 100% improvement over any commercial ATMOS theaters I’ve encountered.

So for anyone wondering what ATMOS is like, please don’t watch it at the commercial ATMOS theaters. Instead, experience ATMOS in a home environment.

If this is an ATMOS disappointment, then we are in for a treat when ATMOS is truly object-based.

Anyway, I can definitely confirm that “Gravity” in ATMOS is top notch.
It looks like you misunderstand what I meant by potential. I don't mean that conventional Atmos systems can't add up to a great sound, what I meant was that object-oriented soundtracks could have made simpler systems better. It could also have made sound mixes easier for sound systems to deal with because it should have been a lot more flexible than what ended up happening.

One other feature of object-oriented sound that I haven't seen utilized is the possibility of a single sound mix to have many separate language tracks, and even commentary tracks, all in one sound mix. Most of these alternate language tracks already operate as meta-data as it is, but an object oriented sound mix can store all of that in the one sound mix itself instead of it just being a meta-data stream on the disc. You should be able to do things like raise dialogue loudness level for those who are hard of hearing and want to hear the dialogue better. This is a much better solution than raising the center channel loudness level that many people have to do currently to improve intelligibility, because when you raise the center channel level, you also raise all of the other sounds that are sent to the center as well, and chances are a lot of those sounds are what is masking dialogue and causing unintelligibility in the first place. With an object-oriented sound mix, you should only need to raise the volume on dialogue object sounds which would increase the loudness of dialogue ONLY and no other sound in the mix. This should have been a no-brainer for an object-oriented sound mix scheme, but I can't believe I have't seen it anywhere. It would be so easy to implement.
 
newsletter

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