Pioneer Atmos Speakers (SP-EFS73/SP-EBS73L/SP-EC73 and SW-E10) Preview

[crossedover]

If people don't have to add or change speakers, then there will be no resistance.

Some of us put more weight on surround sound effects than others. For example, the majority of the film soundtrack is in the front channels, which is similar to real life. Most of us don't really care all that much for what's happening behind us. Sometimes it is actually distracting. But as long as we don't have to change our speaker systems and still get the benefits to some degree, there will be no resistance.

One reason 3D video failed is because it required people to buy new TVs and wear stupid glasses. It wasn't backward compatible. It was very distracting to many people.

If ATMOS can enhance the experience without distracting and costing a lot of money - if it can be backward compatible to existing speakers, I see great success. Look how successful DTS-HD MA is. It didn't require any new speaker system. It didn't require more speakers. There was no reason to resist.

Comparing it to 3d is a little silly. So when surround went from 5.1 to 6.1 to 7.1 and each implementation didn't it require a new avr, a new source player, speakers, etc. Remember when some thought 5 preamps in the analog domain was the only way? Or the BW 800 series sounded bad? DSX? Yamaha front height channels? It shouldn't be skewered with hearing the implementation, it's not 3d.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Comparing it to 3d is a little silly. So when surround went from 5.1 to 6.1 to 7.1 and each implementation didn't it require a new avr, a new source player, speakers, etc. Remember when some thought 5 preamps in the analog domain was the only way? Or the BW 800 series sounded bad? DSX? Yamaha front height channels? It shouldn't be skewered with hearing the implementation, it's not 3d.

When surround went from 5.1 to 6.1 to 7.1 to 9.1, it didn't REQUIRE anything because it was backward compatible. A 7.1 soundtrack sounded perfectly awesome in 5.1.

When DTS-HD MA came out, it didn't require anything either because it was backward compatible. DTS-HD MA contains a DTS-core which sounds perfectly awesome to many people.

I'm sure comparing anything with anything can seem a little silly to some people.

I think mentioning the B&W 800 series in this context is a little silly.

 

[monkish54]

He has been to a few Atmos demonstrations.

I have been to the Atmos version of The Hobbit: An unexpected Journey and it was a pretty outstanding audio mix. The location based cues were much better defined than any commercial theater or home theater I have ever heard.

There is an LA Audio Meet group over on AVS that has seen many more Atmos movies than I, and from what I understand most enjoy it immensely.

 

[crossedover]

I'm sure comparing anything with anything can seem a little silly to some people.

I think mentioning the B&W 800 series in this context is a little silly.

My point was and is simple... first upgrading requires purchase and second even close minded people can change their minds

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

My point was and is simple... first upgrading requires purchase and second even close minded people can change their minds

The salient point is that as long as ATMOS and MDA are backward compatible (like DTS-HD and TrueHD), no one will have to resist.

I don't mind using a 13.1 AVR if it still works great with my 5.1 speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I have been to the Atmos version of The Hobbit: An unexpected Journey and it was a pretty outstanding audio mix. The location based cues were much better defined than any commercial theater or home theater I have ever heard.

There is an LA Audio Meet group over on AVS that has seen many more Atmos movies than I, and from what I understand most enjoy it immensely.

One thing is for certain. ATMOS isn't going to make boring movies more exciting and bad movies much better.

To me, the most important thing (besides the story, acting, and movie itself) about the movie experience is the clear dialogue and awesome bass. As long as the fancy surrounds behind me, beside me, and over my head don't distract me from the clear dialogue and the story itself, I'm peachy.

But most movies still suck with or without ATMOS.

 

[crossedover]

The salient point is that as long as ATMOS and MDA are backward compatible (like DTS-HD and TrueHD), no one will have to resist.

I don't mind using a 13.1 AVR if it still works great with my 5.1 speakers.

The avr's absolutely are. ATMOS is just an additional format

 

[anamorphic96]

The salient point is that as long as ATMOS and MDA are backward compatible (like DTS-HD and TrueHD), no one will have to resist.

I don't mind using a 13.1 AVR if it still works great with my 5.1 speakers.

The new receivers are capable of playing all current formats and Dolby Atmos. Multiple sound options can be contained on one disc as is the case right now. Just like blu rays can play the lossy mix and the lossless version. It will be able to have those older formats as well.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The avr's absolutely are. ATMOS is just an additional format

The new receivers are capable of playing all current formats and Dolby Atmos. Multiple sound options can be contained on one disc as is the case right now. Just like blu rays can play the lossy mix and the lossless version. It will be able to have those older formats as well.

Oh, well, hells, there is no arguing then.

TrueHD and DTS-HD MA are already awesome. But bring on the new ATMOS and MDA.

I guess the next question will be ATMOS & MDA in the BD players themselves to output 7.1 analog.

Personally, I will pass on both since I exclusively use XMBC on my HTPC. But ATMOS doesn't seem to hurt anyone.

 

[gene]

If people don't have to add or change speakers, then there will be no resistance.

Some of us put more weight on surround sound effects than others. For example, the majority of the film soundtrack is in the front channels, which is similar to real life. Most of us don't really care all that much for what's happening behind us. Sometimes it is actually distracting. But as long as we don't have to change our speaker systems and still get the benefits to some degree, there will be no resistance.

One reason 3D video failed is because it required people to buy new TVs and wear stupid glasses. It wasn't backward compatible. It was very distracting to many people.

If ATMOS can enhance the experience without distracting and costing a lot of money - if it can be backward compatible to existing speakers, I see great success. Look how successful DTS-HD MA is. It didn't require any new speaker system. It didn't require more speakers. There was no reason to resist.

Atmos is backwards compatible but it's questionable how much of an improvement there will be listening to Atmos vs TrueHD on a conventional 5.1 or 7.1 surround system. If you want to do a single pair of height channels they have to be located middle of the room which is a bit odd. You can't simply reassign current located surround backs for Atmos from what we understand.

 

[gene]

One thing is for certain. ATMOS isn't going to make boring movies more exciting and bad movies much better.

To me, the most important thing (besides the story, acting, and movie itself) about the movie experience is the clear dialogue and awesome bass. As long as the fancy surrounds behind me, beside me, and over my head don't distract me from the clear dialogue and the story itself, I'm peachy.

But most movies still suck with or without ATMOS.

Agreed to that especially when you've gut guys like JJ Abrams directing films

I saw Gravity is Atmos and it was very distracting to put it mildly. I hope Atmos movies won't be overdone with the height channels like early DTS DVD's were with the rears.

 

[Plexmulti9]

This is not a backwards compatible format. No way, no how. Nor should it be.

1st: To take any sort of firmware upgrade the receiver has to have a network connection. Not the most common feature when talking about the number of receivers in homes. And, even if it were....

2nd: The receivers would have to have additional amplifier channels available to add ATMOS and/or preamp outputs to add external amplification. And, before anyone gets all worked up over the Pioneer ceiling reflective concept....

3rd: That's probably going to end up being junk. Absolutely, positively ridiculous. I love that it's discreet surround channel decoding and then they come out with "non-discreet" speakers for it. Products like this are (as they say in Texas) all hat no cattle. Rather than invest in sound quality, I'm afraid Pioneer went instead for features. Onkyo, anyone?

So, yeah, while they can say these receivers are capable of playing ATMOS it's a parlor trick in my eyes unless there are discreet channels and content for those channels.

 

[zieglj01]

All I know is that movies are becoming more artificial - Superman (Man of Steel), Star Trek (latest versions),
and then the ones like Gravity (poor) - I am really not seeking more so-called thrill rides with bullitts, bombs
and the phasers (it is over-played to begin with). It seems like Atmos wants to play more into this.

 

[fuzz092888]

1st: To take any sort of firmware upgrade the receiver has to have a network connection. Not the most common feature when talking about the number of receivers in homes. And, even if it were....

Not necessarily, there's always the old computer and USB drive. I feel like most homes that have a receiver have a computer connected to the internet and can afford a $10 USB drive.

2nd: The receivers would have to have additional amplifier channels available to add ATMOS and/or preamp outputs to add external amplification. And, before anyone gets all worked up over the Pioneer ceiling reflective concept....

I agree, I would rather have discrete channels.

3rd: That's probably going to end up being junk. Absolutely, positively ridiculous. I love that it's discreet surround channel decoding and then they come out with "non-discreet" speakers for it. Products like this are (as they say in Texas) all hat no cattle. Rather than invest in sound quality, I'm afraid Pioneer went instead for features. Onkyo, anyone?

So, yeah, while they can say these receivers are capable of playing ATMOS it's a parlor trick in my eyes unless there are discreet channels and content for those channels.

Still, I'd like to hear the new Pioneers to see what they're like. I agree that having the discrete channel would definitely be superior, but perhaps the new Pios aren't as bad as we all think they might be. I have a rear surround that has an odd driver configuration and I love it. Di-pole-esque midwoofers, upfiring tweeter, and side firing woofer in a floorstanding package.

 

[anamorphic96]

The top firing drivers on the speakers have a seperate hook up. There are two sets of speaker hook ups on the bottom and top.

We should also keep in mind this is the minimum standard Dolby has set and not the most ideal. But ingenious and looks to work very well from early reports.

 

[crossedover]

All I can say is wow, obviously no one has done enough homework on this yet.

 

[jcparks]

where is the option that says No, I just spent money on a different set of speakers.. ?

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Atmos is backwards compatible but it's questionable how much of an improvement there will be listening to Atmos vs TrueHD on a conventional 5.1 or 7.1 surround system.

I agree there. But it's a great selling feature. We knew it was only a matter of time before something comes after DTS-HD MA & TrueHD.

So is Atmos lossless like DTS-HD MA & TrueHD? If it is lossless, then I guess there's no harm even if the improvement is equivocal.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I saw Gravity is Atmos and it was very distracting to put it mildly. I hope Atmos movies won't be overdone with the height channels like early DTS DVD's were with the rears.

That's exactly what I don't want.

I want to be engrossed in the film and story, not be distracted visually or audibly.

Like some people say, the best system is where everything "disappears" and you are 100% engrossed in the movie itself, not be distracted by some superficial or artificial sound effects.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

All I know is that movies are becoming more artificial - Superman (Man of Steel), Star Trek (latest versions),
and then the ones like Gravity (poor) - I am really not seeking more so-called thrill rides with bullitts, bombs
and the phasers (it is over-played to begin with). It seems like Atmos wants to play more into this.

Exactly. More distraction. Let's focus on the salient points - plot, character, setting, etc.