Hi everybody! I’m working to finalize some decisions about my 13.2 / 15.2 setup (the layout of the last 4-6 speakers in particular needs to be finalized), and I’m interested in any and all advice based on your experimentation/experience.
@TheoN @VonMagnum
I really love what I’ve experienced of Auro-3D and Auromatic, and I am prioritizing compatibility with that format for Movies and Music (allowing Atmos to take a close second priority due to the overwhelming content market share of that format in the US), and DTS:X as a third priority, it being important but less constraining. I’ll likely apply Auromatic processing on top of other formats whenever I have the opportunity since I like the more diffuse sound field it generates.
(A brief aside...) Being raised by a recording studio engineer, I also appreciate a lot of the technical aspects of Auro’s recording, mixing, and mastering philosophy. Much of what happens on scene simply can’t be reproduced after the fact unless properly captured in the moment. This un-compromised realism is preserved through exacting methods such as those Auro has defined. Even though I understand their method isn’t (currently) how movie studios approach soundtracks, I still hold a hope that one day Auro can make their mark on the industry in shifting the foundational content in that direction (even if objects are later added on top of this, no matter the format). The result generates experiences that are difficult (if not impossible) to recreate otherwise, and it’s quite evident by reading others’ opinions who have experienced the end result hunger for more of it. Count me in that group (similar to
Patrick and
Theo in these videos).
So - my current dilemma: Where to place my remaining 4-6 speakers so that I have the best experience with each format. Originally (as shown in my initial SketchUp renderings attached), I mostly followed the layout from Marantz in the manual (and on-screen diagram). This includes Middle Heights for Atmos, Rear Heights for both Atmos and Auro, and Auro’s Top Surround channel with one modification - it will be played by dual mono speakers (signal is split and then separately amplified). Also, they'll be installed flush with the ceiling rather than hanging down like in the pictures.
View attachment 38337
View attachment 38338
View attachment 38339
View attachment 38340
View attachment 38341
After reading through a number of forum threads, I’m now wondering whether I should consider avoiding the compromise between the formats by either (1) adding an extra pair of speakers (switched) to support all optimal layouts for each format, or alternatively (2) reposition and repurpose the speakers I have (again switching likely required still) to have less of a compromise. Honestly, since I’m up to 16 speakers, I’d prefer not to add 2 more, but I’m not eliminating any options yet.
Below are the speaker position options I’m weighing (all speakers would be installed along the top of the walls in a “Height” configuration, and the pre-processor (Marantz AV8805) would be set to 15.2 (13.2 simultaneously) to dynamically support Auro3D and Atmos. In this mode, the pre-pro will consider the rear-most speakers as “rear heights” (regardless of where I actually physically position each speaker pair).
My main questions:
- In your experience, which of these options would sound best with Auro-3D?
- Which would sound best with Atmos?
- How about DTS:X?
- Would any of these change if applying Auromatic?
Speaker Position Options
- Install 2 pairs of speakers, similar to the attached renderings
| Format | Channel Signal | Speaker Position | Degrees |
|---|
| Auro | Surround Height | Rear Height | 135° |
| Atmos | Top Middle
Top Rear | Middle Height
Rear Height | 90°
135° |
- Install 2 pairs of speakers for ideal Auro-3D, and non-ideal Atmos (using SH as Top Middle)
| Format | Channel Signal | Speaker Position | Degrees |
|---|
| Auro | Surround Height | Surround Height | 110° |
Atmos | Top Middle
Top Rear | Surround Height
Rear Height | 110°
135° |
- Install 2 pairs of speakers for ideal Auro-3D, and non-ideal Atmos (using SH as Top Rear). Nothing would be in the RH position, even though the pre-pro would think there is
| Format | Channel Signal | Speaker Position | Degrees |
|---|
| Auro | Surround Height | Surround Height | 110° |
| Atmos | Top Middle
Top Rear | Middle Height
Surround Height | 90°
110° |
- Install 3 pairs of speakers for ideal “Height” positioning for each format (total of 18 speakers)
| Format | Channel Signal | Speaker Position | Degrees |
|---|
| Auro | Surround Height | Surround Height | 110° |
| Atmos | Top Middle
Top Rear | Middle Height
Rear Height | 90°
135° |
I’m currently leaning toward option #2 to avoid having to mount 3 sets of speakers, but still have both an ideal Auro-3D setup and an “almost ideal” Atmos setup.
System Components / Constraints & Room Details
- Room Dimensions (HxWxD): 9 x 11.5 x 18’ (not including inset door area)
- Screen Dimensions: 16:9 133” (diagonal)
- Receiver: Marantz AV8805
- Receiver Layout: 13.1, with Rear Height (for compatibility between formats)
- Bed Layer Speaker Angles (Fronts, Surrounds, Rears): 30, 110, 150 degrees
- Front Heights (Angle, Elevation): 30 degrees wide, 25-30 degrees high
- Surround Heights (Angle, Elevation): 110-120 degrees, 40 degrees
- I‘m reserving some space for room treatments such as bass traps in back corners (floor to ceiling), panels at first reflection points (on walls and ceiling), and probably a bit of diffusion in the back third of the room (likely on side walls behind/above surrounds)
- I realize this is a pretty large setup for a relatively small room. What I’ve assembled as far as equipment goes is meant to last many years (and hopefully be moved into a larger space when moving to our next house eventually). So for now, it’s crammed into this smaller 11.5'x18’x9’ room, but it's still quite enjoyable for the time being
Like I mentioned, I do desire to understand any suggestions you might have (based on your experiments/experience) that would help me optimize all 3 formats, not just 1-2 (and not just Atmos). Thanks!
