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

[Rajith]

Based on my listenings ,I ve found my order of preference for upmixing shall be

1. Auromatic
2. NeuralX
3. DSU.

 

[Erod]

Based on my listenings ,I ve found my order of preference for upmixing shall be

1. Auromatic
2. NeuralX
3. DSU.

I have it exactly the opposite, especially because Auro3D is dead on arrival in the US.

DSU is far more enveloping than Neural X in my truly dedicated theater room.

 

[VonMagnum]

I have it exactly the opposite, especially because Auro3D is dead on arrival in the US.

What does that have to do with the upmixer, though? The answer is nothing whatsoever.

DSU is far more enveloping than Neural X in my truly dedicated theater room.

Truly dedicated? Is that implying our systems are not dedicated so that's why we don't appreciate DSU or something?

By all means enjoy whatever you like, but that doesn't invalidate other opinions.

For movies, I'd go:

1> Neural X (DSU is fine on the bed level, but far too timid with overheads and not individualized (just left/right arrays). In Top Gun, you not only don't get the jets overhead very well, but they don't move front to back since they all play the same thing in that plane. I don't know how anyone could find that superior. The only issue is it might sometimes put things overhead that don't belong there, but seeing my screen is mostly above ear level, it tends to be plausible anyway here unless it's 100% on the ceiling.

2> DSU - Lacks proper overhead effects compared to Neural X, but does a credible job for bed level. It's still probably superior to the old Dolby Digital and True playback mist if the time (although jets were overhead still with the old 2/3 up the wall surround placement). But certainly it steers the rear channels better than the old system.

3> Auro - It's fine for native material but given the lack of such, I find the upmixer effects better suited to music and mono movies than surround. It just seems a little too laid back.

For music, I like stereo the best, but Auro and DSU both sound better to me than Neural X which tends to put instruments on the ceiling that don't belong there. I don't mind with movies (many do that anyway with Atmos and X), but not stereo.

 

[Erod]

What does that have to do with the upmixer, though? The answer is nothing whatsoever.



Truly dedicated? Is that implying our systems are not dedicated so that's why we don't appreciate DSU or something?

By all means enjoy whatever you like, but that doesn't invalidate other opinions.

For movies, I'd go:

1> Neural X (DSU is fine on the bed level, but far too timid with overheads and not individualized (just left/right arrays). In Top Gun, you not only don't get the jets overhead very well, but they don't move front to back since they all play the same thing in that plane. I don't know how anyone could find that superior. The only issue is it might sometimes put things overhead that don't belong there, but seeing my screen is mostly above ear level, it tends to be plausible anyway here unless it's 100% on the ceiling.

2> DSU - Lacks proper overhead effects compared to Neural X, but does a credible job for bed level. It's still probably superior to the old Dolby Digital and True playback mist if the time (although jets were overhead still with the old 2/3 up the wall surround placement). But certainly it steers the rear channels better than the old system.

3> Auro - It's fine for native material but given the lack of such, I find the upmixer effects better suited to music and mono movies than surround. It just seems a little too laid back.

For music, I like stereo the best, but Auro and DSU both sound better to me than Neural X which tends to put instruments on the ceiling that don't belong there. I don't mind with movies (many do that anyway with Atmos and X), but not stereo.

That's all fine, but hasn't been my experience.

For what it's worth, just about every professional home theater reviewer and designer rates DSU as superior to Neural X. In fact, I get more activity overhead with DSU, especially in general ambiance, and too often Neural X mixes wrong sound overhead. I've had screen voices projected above my head.. The atmosphere of wind, crowd noise, and background score do not get amply pulled to the overhead, so the sound stage isn't as full with Neural X to me.

Most people use DSU and agree with me on this, but like you said, it's all up to us individually. It doesn't matter what each of us likes in the end.

 

[Auditor55]

I hope not. Vinyl is still going strong.

I still see people buying CDs, DVDs, SACD, and BD.

Vinyl might be going strong among a select group of hipsters and sour old audiophiles trying to romanticize a bygone era. Just as bell bottom jeans made a slight come back in the late 90's, they went away for good proving there come was blip in time and only just a fad. Vinyl and eventually optical disc as whole will blow away with time as technology continues to move forward.

 

[Auditor55]

I don't think I could stand to watch more than 30 minutes of Waterworld even if it had outstanding overhead use...god-awful movie. I can't stand most Kevin Costner movies.... Waterworld was the pits (although it was funny watching him drink his own urine. Yum. ) (Ok it was urine recycled into water but still)

It's amazing to how people $30 on horrible movies just because they are 4K HDR.

 

[Auditor55]

Oh your agenda is crystal clear now.

You support a format that is DEAD (Auro3D),instead of a format that has been around since 2013 (Atmos) and still growing in numbers.

You support a format that is DEAD, only because your AVR just happens to support the DEAD format.

I believe it’s like what Von mentioned about the X8500 - they chose to support Auro3D and they chose WRONG because Auro3D is dead.

You can’t even buy a single Auro3D BluRay in the USA - like at Best Buy, Amazon, Walmart, etc.

But you still support it?

That makes no sense.

You support a format that has ZERO content (Auro3D),but you are 100% against the other 2 formats (Atmos, DTSX) that have thousands of contents in both BluRay discs and STREAMING services.

And Streaming services. Did I mention streaming services?

If you own and a Denon or a Marantz, your receiver supports Auro-3D. I don't have an Auro-3D setup. I also agree, that Auro-3D is dead, particularly in the U.S.. However, that doesn't mean their approach, on paper, isn't a better way to approach immersive audio. In my opinion, Auro-3D would be easier to implement and more consumer friendly than the other systems. For example, for Atmos to work as recommended by Dolby, you must have the height channels on the ceiling. That's a problem for consumers and its been the biggest problem for home Atmos from the outset to the present. Dolby knows it, that's why we have Dolby Atmos enabled speakers, which many people on forums like this turn their noses up to. Dolby knew that many consumers, like those that might live in apartments, could not mount ceiling speakers, so we give you the enabled speakers. In Auro-3D, where you do have VOG speaker for the ceiling, it is more or less optional, you don't really need it for the immersive experience.

Recently I went to the Dolby home page and I see that they have some new recommended speaker configurations for a home Atmos system, even a hybrid system where speakers and enabled speakers are both employed in an Atmos system. They must be listening to the critics.

 

[VonMagnum]

That's all fine, but hasn't been my experience.

For what it's worth,

Well that's the real question isn't it?

just about every professional home theater reviewer and designer rates DSU as superior to Neural X.

I must have missed all those "professional" reviews since the ones I read the past year since researching immersive sound all preferred Neural X for the reasons I specified. The Top Gun example came from a three way upmixer comparison online. The Hell if it wasn't right. James Bond Spectre was the other example with the helicopter spinning in mid air.

In fact, I get more activity overhead with DSU, especially in general ambiance, and too often Neural X mixes wrong sound overhead.

It's funny because I don't recall a single person anywhere saying they like DSU better until now. DSU sucks compared to Neural X. I didn't want to have to say it, but there it is. It's not even close. It doesn't support front wides or individual overheads. Ambience is the ONLY thing it does overhead, so yeah I can see where you might think you hear more ambience since it doesn't put other sounds up there. Helicopters flying on the ground? You betcha! That's natural sounding? Please.

Most people use DSU and agree with me on this, but like you said, it's all up to us individually. It doesn't matter what each of us likes in the end.

I'd like to see ONE person that agrees with you, let alone "most". It's easy to say something, another to prove it.

I don't care what someone likes better, but I get irritated when people imply their opinion is better because their system is somehow better or more accurate than the people who disagree (implying everyone else must have done it wrong) and the whole world magically agrees with them just because they say so.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I also agree, that Auro-3D is dead, particularly in the U.S.. However, that doesn't mean their approach, on paper, isn't a better way to approach immersive audio. In my opinion, Auro-3D would be easier to implement and more consumer friendly than the other systems.

Oh, I see what you mean.

Yeah, ceiling speakers can be a total PITA to install.

Auro3D seems to be easier to implement. But does it sound as good without the Ceiling (VOG) speakers?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have it exactly the opposite, especially because Auro3D is dead on arrival in the US.

DSU is far more enveloping than Neural X in my truly dedicated theater room.

I really wanted DSU to win. That way it wouldn’t matter with the Dolby upmix restriction.

But “unfortunately” NeuralX is winning for me. DSU seems very conservative to me.

 

[VonMagnum]

Auro3D seems to be easier to implement. But does it sound as good without the Ceiling (VOG) speakers?

I don't have the VOG and I get a nice overhead effect from that position anyway, but I can see where it would do better for off-center seats to have one (as the effect pulls left/right without a center like all stereo type sources do when sitting off center),but even then I've read the height speakers play the same sounds also (creating an array effect, probably to give a more diffuse everywhere overhead effect maybe?).

What I wonder more about is whether it would create a better/different sound if you had the VOG speakers higher up than the side heights (i.e. giving a different depth to the effect vertically). Would/could you tell a difference? Sometimes I think the thunderstorm effects while overhead don't sound quite like some real storms which sound "higher up" to me, but then I've been fooled before in both directions (real thunderstorms can vary quite a bit in loudness, direction and how close the thunder sounds). We're less sensitive to height information for distance (diffuse factor seems to play in),but less doesn't necessarily mean none.

I have wondered if the upmixers may vary somewhat based on height speakers versus in-ceiling, etc., but I don't even hear much difference that some claim between the height setting and tops setting without changing the actual speaker type. I've assumed that might have something to do with having extracted top middle speakers added (6 total overhead) compared to only say 4 on/in ceiling or 4 heights. But sounds that pan across the ceiling just pan across the ceiling (e.g. Fury has some slower moving pans that start in the front and go all the way into the rear of the room). How "different" could it sound with in-ceiling speakers?

If the sound is on the ceiling and pans the total length and width of it, how different would it sound with in-ceiling except to possibly limit the starting end points (since they're generally starting further away from the screen than "height" speakers do and end long before the back wall of the room whereas my height speakers are at the top of the screen and go to the very back of the room with the side heights in the middle performing top middle duty so a sound can technically travel the entire length of the room. If I had 4 in-ceiling speakers instead, to be at 45 degrees, they would start about 6 feet into the room from either direction and thus there would be potentially 12 feet less possibly positions for overhead sounds to image (that's HALF the total length of the room! Add top middle there and you're still just covering 12 feet instead of 24 feet and with the 45 degree positions, I wouldn't technically need top middle since the angles would then be close enough to phantom overhead whereas to do 24 feet, I need top middle to bridge the gap so it images cleanly across the entire ceiling).

Now I have thought of adding 4 more speakers in the "tops" positions in line from the heights and then using the side heights only for Auro-3D (i.e. 8 overheads instead of 6). That would get rid of the slight drop at the side heights (because of a steel beam box in the room) and might anchor the sounds better overall for more seats, but unfortunately, there's no way short of a Trinnov to render the speakers completely separately so there would be some overlap as the two AVRs would be assuming there were only heights and only tops so even if the heights image different, there's still overlap. It still might be a slightly improved effect. I'd love to hear that setup with a Trinnov controlling it, though (i.e. "true discrete" 11.1.8).

I suppose it could be faked quite effectively with enough Dolby Processors, though (i.e. create top middle pre-outs and then split it again between front height and top middle to create a Pro Logic extracted set of tops, although I think I'd have to leave the top middles in place to get it right so it'd end up being 11.1.10, which kind of sounds awesome, having overheads nearly equal the bed speakers. Add VOG to that (extracted so it works with everything) and you'd be at 11.1.11 and have anchored sounds for just about everything ave CH and RH which you could also create (11.1.13, which is more than anything native Atmos or X Pro could/would put out and would/should literally sound the same for every single seat no matter what). But damn, you'd need one big rack of processors. Someone could make a box that has nothing but Pro Logic chips in it with all the center outs and that would make it reasonable to do... we need a Kickstart Project!!!

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Pet Sematary 2019 4K Atmos.

The overhead sound isn't always active like Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049, but that's expected of this movie.

However, when it happens, the OH sound is CREEPY AS HELL. Extremely realistic, scary, and fun when it happens.

So because of that, I have to put it on the list.

1. Pacific Rim 2013 Atmos
2. Blade Runner 2049 2017 4K Atmos
3. Cloverfield Paradox 2018 Atmos
4. The Equalizer 2014 Atmos
5. The Great Wall 2016 Atmos
6. Hunter Killer 2018 Atmos
7. The Matrix Trilogy 1999, 2003, 2003 4K Atmos
8. Oblivion 2013 Atmos
9. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies 2016 Atmos
10. Salt 2010 Atmos
11. Sully 2016 Atmos
12. Twilight 2008 Atmos
13. Underworld 2003 Atmos
14. Underworld Blood Wars 2016 Atmos
15. Atomic Blonde 2017 DTSX
16. Harry Potter franchise (8 movies) 2001-2011 4K DTSX
17. Black Hawk Down 2001 4K Atmos
18. 13 Hours 2016 4K Atmos
19. Gravity 2013 Atmos
20. Ready Player One 2018 Atmos
21. Robin Hood 2018 Atmos
22. Jurassic World 4K DTSX
23. Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom 4K DTSX
24. Terminator Genisys 4K Atmos
25. Alita Battle Angel 2019 4K Atmos
26. Pet Sematary (2019) 4K Atmos

 

[Erod]

Well that's the real question isn't it?



I must have missed all those "professional" reviews since the ones I read the past year since researching immersive sound all preferred Neural X for the reasons I specified. The Top Gun example came from a three way upmixer comparison online. The Hell if it wasn't right. James Bond Spectre was the other example with the helicopter spinning in mid air.



It's funny because I don't recall a single person anywhere saying they like DSU better until now. DSU sucks compared to Neural X. I didn't want to have to say it, but there it is. It's not even close. It doesn't support front wides or individual overheads. Ambience is the ONLY thing it does overhead, so yeah I can see where you might think you hear more ambience since it doesn't put other sounds up there. Helicopters flying on the ground? You betcha! That's natural sounding? Please.



I'd like to see ONE person that agrees with you, let alone "most". It's easy to say something, another to prove it.

I don't care what someone likes better, but I get irritated when people imply their opinion is better because their system is somehow better or more accurate than the people who disagree (implying everyone else must have done it wrong) and the whole world magically agrees with them just because they say so.

Pretty much every expert reviewer on the internet. Including Gene, I believe.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

DSU sucks compared to Neural X. I didn't want to have to say it, but there it is.

I think I've also said that DSU sucks compared to NeuralX a few times.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Pretty much every expert reviewer on the internet. Including Gene, I believe.

It's a matter of preference.

In the end it's about what you like better, not what OTHERS like better.

If you like DSU better, then naturally you use DSU. And I guess you're lucky because you don't have to worry about the Dolby restriction since you don't use NeuralX anyway.

People who LOVE NeuralX and HATE DSU have to worry about that stupid Dolby restriction.

 

[Erod]

It's a matter of preference.

In the end it's about what you like better, not what OTHERS like better.

If you like DSU better, then naturally you use DSU.

I agree. That guy needs to relax. Sheesh.

This is just a silly audio/video hobby. We can all do what we want.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I agree. That guy needs to relax. Sheesh.

This is just a silly audio/video hobby. We can all do what we want.

It is hobby, so it's also therapeutic for many of us.

But it's not neurosurgery or rocket science.

 

[VonMagnum]

Pretty much every expert reviewer on the internet. Including Gene, I believe.

I need to relax? You continually use inflammatory language like "every EXPERT on the Internet" (agrees with ME) (implying on only fools like Neural X). If you don't want controversey, stop using controversial language. That just begs for me to dig up reviews saying the opposite (e.g. https://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/dolby-dts-auro-surround-sound-upmixer-comparison/), but I really don't feel like wasting my time over something subjective.

 

[liquid360]

I need to relax? You continually use inflammatory language like "every EXPERT on the Internet" (agrees with ME) (implying on only fools like Neural X). If you don't want controversey, stop using controversial language. That just begs for me to dig up reviews saying the opposite (e.g. https://www.highdefdigest.com/blog/dolby-dts-auro-surround-sound-upmixer-comparison/), but I really don't feel like wasting my time over something subjective.

Truer words....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[VonMagnum]

I've got Alita Battle Angel 3D (Atmos included on 2D to move over at least, I believe) on the way now (Captain Marvel still not here yet either). Still having some issues with my left ear, unfortunately. Might have to go back to the doctor again....