lets talk about front wides

[ratso]

they are definitely having a moment again. i hear that "nobody uses them", "front wides are dying". well a bunch of heavy hitters lately are saying that front wides are more useful in a system then an extra pair of overhead atmos speakers, or even rear surrounds. who is championing them? guys like anthony grimani, who definitely knows what he's talking about. but i am running into more problems than answers when it comes to wide channel support. i have read that support for wides was ended on a bunch of avr's a few years ago, and now that the format is getting popular again (mostly because directors/movie sound guys are starting to use them more and more in movies) that support is starting to pick up and companies are going to include them on new models. if you look at the back of the denon avr x8500H and x6700H they have labeled speaker outputs for wide channel. also the flagship marantz. so it would seem the other avr's don't support wide. however i am also being told that in the amp assign in mid/lower level avr's you can select wide or height in different receivers. i cannot find this verified in any of the manuals. i have also seen evidence of people getting sound out of their wides from lower priced avr's, is this being upmixed in atmos? what do you need exactly to get wides into your system these days?

 

[j_garcia]

I would say not worth chasing down. I believe my 7705 has the option of height or wide, but having heard it in a friend's setup before, I can't say it got me too excited. You need a pretty big room for them to be a benefit and that benefit is completely processed vs. Atmos where the sound is already embedded in the track. I would tend to agree that wide has already fallen out of favor.

 

[ryanosaur]

I think when DTSX Pro is finally more widely in use, Wides will become much more active. I think for many, currently, it is hit and miss, like some of the overhead placements can be.
Also, the size of the room and how you are able to place Speakers will have a serious impact.

A standard 5- or 7-channel bed layer could be fudged a little to suit individual arrangements. Yes, efficacy still comes into play as to whether you get a convincing surround field, but you could fudge it a little.

Most of the failures I've caught glimpses of with Overhead placements come about from poor choices. Add to that the state of inconsistent upmixers where there are many reports of Top Middle not working in one soundtrack, but another cuts out Top Front and Top Rear while sending the signal to the TMs.
*shrugs

I think that they will become more useful as HT people are most assuredly interested in them, even if using something like the Monolith Wide Synth feature on the HTP-1 (where the processor creates a Wide output based on combining the Main + Surround signal to send to that position). (I've also heard that the signal in this case can be unbalanced and some report cutting the output by several dB to get those Wides to blend and integrate properly.)

Anyway, I think there is definitely too much rush to keep adding more Speakers, more channels. It's a good thing when it works. Not so great when it doesn't.

To that end, unless you have a processor that can specifically support them, you are more likely than not going to get shorted on the performance aspect. Again, DTSX Pro is supposed to include upmixing to Wides, as I understand it, but so many processors still have yet to implement it (leading me to believe [speculation] there is something buggy about final implementation or required processing power that simply isn't going to be supported until the next generation of devices).
After all, if Atmos mixes and upmixing is still somewhat of a chancy affair, do you think the resurgence of Wides is going to actually come off without a hitch? ...Or 5? And if Atmos mixes still don't include ability to utilize all locations, how long will it take for mixes to start including more than the most standard 5-channel info?

Lastly, going back to room size and proper placement, I suspect that you likely need more space to place these properly. Not saying it cannot be done with a shoehorn, but I [example] probably only have about 8' linear from Main to matching Surround. And, in an 11'w room, where would you try to place those Speakers?
My guess is that to be more effective, you want more distance from Main to Surround, (perhaps 10-15') as well as more lateral distance to work with (perhaps more like 15-17' wide). You need your Mains a minimum of 8' apart (mine are 6') and you need space to separate Main from Wide to Surround.

Here is the Dolby angles for a 9-channel Bed Layer:

Such is the situation with Atmos Placement that you really need to pay attention to the Angles to get the full effect, and Atmos raises the bar in placement by making you get the Height appropriate as well as Left/Right, Front/Back.

 

[lovinthehd]

While my avr does support wides, found my room just a bit narrow to appreciate such.

 

[ratso]

I thank you both for the replies, but I'm not trying to debate whether or not the wide layout is good. Everyone will have there own opinion on that and as I said there are currently a lot af big name guys saying it is very much worth it (I believe that Gene is a fan). The question is for people interested in doing it, what are the current options for it?

 

[lovinthehd]

Does the 4xxx series of Denon still support wides? Seems some of them did/do....

 

[ratso]

It looks like you upmix in the dsu.

 

[lovinthehd]

It looks like you upmix in the dsu.

DSU is an upmixer....

 

[ratso]

With the dsu

 

[lovinthehd]

With the dsu

Believe the wide inclusion still depends on specific application....but really don't follow this, just from what I remember. Just consider it for the .02 that's worth these days

 

[TLS Guy]

You might want to take a look at this thread.

And this one as well.

 

[VonMagnum]

A room doesn't need to be "wide" to use front wide speakers. My room is 12' wide and they fit just fine. They can end up on the side walls part way into the room. They really are more of a front-centric surround speaker. They simply go between the mains and side surrounds. In fact, in a full 34 speaker Atmos setup, Dolby shows the left/right mains part way into the room in the diagram. All that matters is the angle.

There's a nice article on the Wendy Carlos quad surround sound website that explains how even with a quadraphonic 4-channel system how arrayed extra speakers can greatly improve phantom imaging. According to that site, you need 70 degrees or less to get a solid phantom image fully between any pair of speakers. That's just not possible with four speakers (90 degrees between each pair unless you compromise the rear speakers even further).

Also, we don't hear phantom stereo imaging the same way behind us as in front of us and to the sides so two pairs behind you can help widen it (I use sides at 110 degrees, ss#2 summed arrays at 135 degrees and rears at 150 degrees. I also have summed array front wides on the side wall between the sides and main speakers. This gives a strong 360 degree image from all three rows of seats. I have 8 speakers overhead as well (Top Middle are a split array so drivers face all three rows of seats). Spaced overhead on either side of my steel beam box, that keeps all speakers within 65 degrees maximum with floor speakers no more than 55 degrees apart (chairs limit how far back the wides can go and having sides at 110 degrees let them function as Dolby 5.1 speakers if desired.

The extra arrayed surround speakers image strong and precise in-phase, but sound extremely spacious for out-of-phase material. Auro-3D church music recordings (Himmelborgan and Himmelrand) sound spectacularly realistic this way like I'm really there rather than a pipe organ and choir in my room. The ceiling sounds 50 feet high and the walls over 100 (you do need a dead/dampened room to really get the full effect as you're replacing your room acoustics with more simulated reflection angles from the actual recording via more real pairs of speakers.

Best of all, arrayed summed pairs work with all recordings and surround formats (e.g. You get front wides that work with Auro-3D and locked Atmos soundtracks. The Monoprice HTP-1 has arrayed wides, but it's just a front main array. Summed main+wides work much better.

You can also use Pro Logic units to create mostly discrete (Called "Scatmos" on AVS forums) front wides, ss#2 and Top Middle from the two signals (similar to what DTS:X Pro does with Neural X digitally). I use that method for Top Middle that works with everything and is nearly as discrete as actual rendered Top Middle, but isn't defeated by Disney locked channel soundtracks.

 

[DJ7675]

they are definitely having a moment again. i hear that "nobody uses them", "front wides are dying". well a bunch of heavy hitters lately are saying that front wides are more useful in a system then an extra pair of overhead atmos speakers, or even rear surrounds. who is championing them? guys like anthony grimani, who definitely knows what he's talking about. but i am running into more problems than answers when it comes to wide channel support. i have read that support for wides was ended on a bunch of avr's a few years ago, and now that the format is getting popular again (mostly because directors/movie sound guys are starting to use them more and more in movies) that support is starting to pick up and companies are going to include them on new models. if you look at the back of the denon avr x8500H and x6700H they have labeled speaker outputs for wide channel. also the flagship marantz. so it would seem the other avr's don't support wide. however i am also being told that in the amp assign in mid/lower level avr's you can select wide or height in different receivers. i cannot find this verified in any of the manuals. i have also seen evidence of people getting sound out of their wides from lower priced avr's, is this being upmixed in atmos? what do you need exactly to get wides into your system these days?

Front wides are room and content dependent...
-In your room if you have a large gap between your front speakers and surrounds (angle) there will be a hole as things pad around the room. So in some rooms it sounds fantastic IMO.
-It is also content/format dependent. If your processor supports DTSX Pro it will upmix all content except Dolby Atmos (stereo, dts, dolby 5.1 etc) to all of the channels in your layout (and of course native dts:x). Atmos use of front wides will be depending on the source material. Some atmos uses objects to great effect, while some it will remain silent.
I use the DTS Nerual X upmixer on all content except for stereo (I think it is terrible with stereo content). But with it is amazing with various 5.1/7.1 content. YMMV as it will depend on your room and what content you listen to, but it is a very nice addition in my room and wouldn't want to be without them. If I had to choose between surround backs and front wides, I would actually choose wides if your room made sense to add them.

 

[jbonn500]

Forgive me for digging this thread out of the past.

I'm considering adding a set of front wides or perhaps sides to my room. See picture. Would it make sense to hang a set of speakers in the far corners? Ignore the speaker above the mains. I hung those 10 years ago and haven't taken them down yet because I need to patch the holes and paint (which will happen when the drywall is up; been in the middle of a small remodel).

I also have room to hang the speakers, at ceiling height, anywhere between the surrounds and mains. I currently have a set of ceiling speakers mounted just in front of the MLP. But I don't have room to hang any speakers behind the MLP, unfortunately. Would love any thoughts.

ETA: I can program the speakers, regardless of placement, has front heights or wides, which is worth considering as well.

 

[shadyJ]

Forgive me for digging this thread out of the past.

I'm considering adding a set of front wides or perhaps sides to my room. See picture. Would it make sense to hang a set of speakers in the far corners? Ignore the speaker above the mains. I hung those 10 years ago and haven't taken them down yet because I need to patch the holes and paint (which will happen when the drywall is up; been in the middle of a small remodel).

I also have room to hang the speakers, at ceiling height, anywhere between the surrounds and mains. I currently have a set of ceiling speakers mounted just in front of the MLP. But I don't have room to hang any speakers behind the MLP, unfortunately. Would love any thoughts.

ETA: I can program the speakers, regardless of placement, has front heights or wides, which is worth considering as well.
View attachment 64616

Wides may be of limited value unless you have a processor that can upscale to wide channels. For some reason, most Atmos sound mixes eschew wides, or at least last I heard they did. If it is all a hassle, I wouldn't bother expanding to wides. You already have a good sound system, and it doesn't need the help of more surround channels to be enjoyed.

 

[jbonn500]

Wides may be of limited value unless you have a processor that can upscale to wide channels. For some reason, most Atmos sound mixes eschew wides, or at least last I heard they did. If it is all a hassle, I wouldn't bother expanding to wides. You already have a good sound system, and it doesn't need the help of more surround channels to be enjoyed.

I have an Anthem AVM 70, which does support wide speakers. I think I'll hang a set and just listen. Front heights might be the way to go.

 

[dlaloum]

Apparently the new Denon X6800 supports wides, and it supports them with the Dolby Surround Upmixer - which would presumably make wides available for pretty much everything including Atmos.

(Don't know whether Auro also support the wides...)

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

which would presumably make wides available for pretty much everything including Atmos.

Except that you can’t apply an upmixer to an Atmos track. Only if you select the DD plus base track. But that would defeat the purpose.

 

[TLS Guy]

Apparently the new Denon X6800 supports wides, and it supports them with the Dolby Surround Upmixer - which would presumably make wides available for pretty much everything including Atmos.

(Don't know whether Auro also support the wides...)

I really think this is a downgrade.

I think the real problem is that people get the front and left right far too close together and too close to the center.

I see that defect in nearly all the pictures. When you do that, you get far too much interference between speakers.

Ideally you need at least 8 ft. between speakers and at least seven.

I certainly do not need wides here. The sound stage thrown up seems much larger than the actual room.

Unless you have a really huge room, wides will be a downgrade and cost you money at the same time. Domestically wides are a total nonsense.

The physics and acoustics of that layout are correct.

 

[dlaloum]

I really think this is a downgrade.

I think the real problem is that people get the front and left right far too close together and too close to the center.

I see that defect in nearly all the pictures. When you do that, you get far too much interference between speakers.

Ideally you need at least 8 ft. between speakers and at least seven.

I certainly do not need wides here. The sound stage thrown up seems much larger than the actual room.

Unless you have a really huge room, wides will be a downgrade and cost you money at the same time. Domestically wides are a total nonsense.

The physics and acoustics of that layout are correct.

for a 7 speaker base layer, having wides has a greater impact on immersion than surround rears...

But either alternative is only a marginal improvement over a really well sorted 5 speaker base layer - in most cases the additional pair of speakers don't add that much!