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

panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Spartan
I think the best way to sum up the last 2 seasons of GOT is that they were good, but they could have been even better since they rushed it.

Yeah, if GOT had 10 seasons, instead of 8 seasons, it would have been even better than it was.

So let's hope HBO learned their lesson and don't rush the new "House of the Dragon".

BTW, House of the Dragon is supposed to be shot using Digital 4K cameras and mixed in ATMOS, so should look and sound amazing.
Let's hope they've learned their lesson and don't screw up the streaming versions by compressing it to hell.
 
M

Movie2099

Audioholic General
I think the best way to sum up the last 2 seasons of GOT is that they were good, but they could have been even better since they rushed it.

Yeah, if GOT had 10 seasons, instead of 8 seasons, it would have been even better than it was.

So let's hope HBO learned their lesson and don't rush the new "House of the Dragon".

BTW, House of the Dragon is supposed to be shot using Digital 4K cameras and mixed in ATMOS, so should look and sound amazing.
I just saw that a GoT vet has directed 3 episodes. Miguel Sapochnik. He directed some of the best episodes for GoT's. He directed S5- "The Gift" and "Hardhome", S6- "Battle of the Bastards" and "The winds of Winter", S8- "The Long night" and "The Bells".
 
Replicant 7

Replicant 7

Audioholic Samurai
The entire reason why S7 and S8 were bombs was because of the Producers/writers. They were being asked by Disney to jump over and work on Star Wars crap. They rushed to end the series which definitely showed in the final two seasons. RR Martin did not have a book for reference anymore so they made stuff up with info they got from Martin. Supposedly Martin gave them the ending, but clearly from what Martin has said since the show ended, that the shows ending was not what he was going to do. Now, part of me says "he gave them that ending because he knew it sucked and he would write something better for his books so it sells more." hahaha

Martin begged HBO to have full 10 episode seasons for every single season because of how much information there was. But the HBO heads listened to the crap hole producers instead and shortened everything up and let them make all the final decisions. Clearly they should've listened to Martin.

Now I'm not saying there wasn't good in those seasons (S7/S8). There definitely was. But it was all rushed. They threw way too much in so they could attempt to wrap everything up. But all they did was destroy their legacy and one of the greatest shows on TV. You should not fail when a major studio hands you $200 million and you have the writer of the books on staff to help with ideas. Haha.

Where are those producers now? oh yeah, Disney cut them after GOT ended. hahaha. Good!
Where the dragon Queen was flying around burning up King's landing, they sure strung that out way too long. That's some good info you posted up.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
I finished re-watching Spider-Man 3 (Tobey Maguire), this time in 4K.

Atmos is excellent. Story is pretty decent, but not as good as part 1 and 2. Picture quality is better than part 1 and 2, which means it’s decent for analog 35mm film.
 
panteragstk

panteragstk

Audioholic Spartan
I finished re-watching Spider-Man 3 (Tobey Maguire), this time in 4K.

Atmos is excellent. Story is pretty decent, but not as good as part 1 and 2. Picture quality is better than part 1 and 2, which means it’s decent for analog 35mm film.
That one still pisses me off. Not enough Venom.
 
C

caustic386

Audioholic Intern
Sorry if this has already been discussed, it's such a monster thread at this point.

If my main use case is 2ch upmixing for music, what would you say are the requirements for surrounds/heights? That is to say, for discreet content you'd want all speakers to be of similar capacity (reality is different, of course). But for upmixing, almost always Auro3D in my case, is there even anything happening below 80Hz on the bed layer surrounds? Below 100Hz on the height layer? I know Gene did some frequency analysis between Dolby, etc, but I don't believe he went that deep.

Because this system is 99% 2ch, I don't use a center if that matters somehow. Thanks!
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Sorry if this has already been discussed, it's such a monster thread at this point.

If my main use case is 2ch upmixing for music, what would you say are the requirements for surrounds/heights? That is to say, for discreet content you'd want all speakers to be of similar capacity (reality is different, of course). But for upmixing, almost always Auro3D in my case, is there even anything happening below 80Hz on the bed layer surrounds? Below 100Hz on the height layer? I know Gene did some frequency analysis between Dolby, etc, but I don't believe he went that deep.

Because this system is 99% 2ch, I don't use a center if that matters somehow. Thanks!
Are you using a subwoofer or do you mean 2CH = 2 speakers without subwoofer?

If you set the AVR’s XO (High-Pass) to 80Hz, 100Hz or 120Hz, anything below that will go to the subwoofers or I think to the FR/FL if you don’t use subwoofers.
 
C

caustic386

Audioholic Intern
Are you using a subwoofer or do you mean 2CH = 2 speakers without subwoofer?

If you set the AVR’s XO (High-Pass) to 80Hz, 100Hz or 120Hz, anything below that will go to the subwoofers or I think to the FR/FL if you don’t use subwoofers.
Ah sorry maybe I'm doing a bad job of presenting my Q. I will be using subs, but I'm trying to determine the specs I should be looking for specifically in the surrounds/heights knowing that 90-95% of playback will be in the front L/R when upmixing.

For example, -6dB @ 40Hz for bed, -6 @ 50Hz for height? The simplest answer is probably "the cheapest option within the same lineup", but hoping I can flesh out more detail than that for my own education. Looking at one of the more expensive Atmos options, Kef R8a, one could wager that 120Hz (as often mentioned on forums) is the cutoff for upfiring or height speakers.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Ah sorry maybe I'm doing a bad job of presenting my Q. I will be using subs, but I'm trying to determine the specs I should be looking for specifically in the surrounds/heights knowing that 90-95% of playback will be in the front L/R when upmixing.

For example, -6dB @ 40Hz for bed, -6 @ 50Hz for height? The simplest answer is probably "the cheapest option within the same lineup", but hoping I can flesh out more detail than that for my own education. Looking at one of the more expensive Atmos options, Kef R8a, one could wager that 120Hz (as often mentioned on forums) is the cutoff for upfiring or height speakers.
I think the safest answer is to get the “best you can afford” with the best bass and DYNAMICS even if the surround/height usually don’t have much of any bass below 80Hz.

Dynamics mean playing louder without distorting. So bigger better quality drivers usually = more dynamics, which is probably more important than just playing below 80Hz.

I have heard “bass from the ceiling speakers”. I would guess the bass is probably from 80-400Hz or 100-400Hz.

For example, my ceiling ATMOS speakers all have 1” Aluminum Tweeter and 8” Aluminum Woofer.
 
S

sterling shoote

Audioholic Field Marshall
Atmos is the equivalent of my 30 year old Coleman Lantern. I've got to pump and pump and pump to finally get it to fire up. Atmos is like that I think, interested parties pumping and pumping it up with hope that it will catch fire. I thought Apple Music's Spatial Audio might be good kindling and maybe it is but unless you've already got an Atmos system to enjoy Spatial Audio as you would stereo music from speakers there's just too much expense and too little promise that the experience will be justified. For me, it appears I can get a bit of surround sound from Spatial Audio via connection of an Apple TV to my OPPO, which hands off 5.1 to a 22 year old analog preamp. But even though I can get this means to music operating for less than $200 I have had no motivation to do so because I have not yet seen a Spatial Audio tune from Apple Music that has been compelling enough to want to indulge in it. So for now I am still a 5.1 SACD kind of guy.
 
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Warlord
Atmos is the equivalent of my 30 year old Coleman Lantern. I've got to pump and pump and pump to finally get it to fire up. Atmos is like that I think, interested parties pumping and pumping it up with hope that it will catch fire. I thought Apple Music's Spatial Audio might be good kindling and maybe it is but unless you've already got an Atmos system to enjoy Spatial Audio as you would stereo music from speakers there's just too much expense and too little promise that the experience will be justified. For me, it appears I can get a bit of surround sound from Spatial Audio via connection of an Apple TV to my OPPO, which hands off 5.1 to a 22 year old analog preamp. But even though I can get this means to music operating for less than $200 I have had no motivation to do so because I have not yet seen a Spatial Audio tune from Apple Music that has been compelling enough to want to indulge in it. So for now I am still a 5.1 SACD kind of guy.
Haha! Have fun in the dark ages. I’m very fortunate to have a 7.x.4 Atmos system and while some spatial music is “odd” the ones that are good are head and shoulders above 5/7.1.

So while some will justify not investing in Atmos, I say ignorance is bliss and please be careful not to fall of the edge of the earth. So until you have placed height/top speakers in the proper locations, and calibrated, then there’s no way you can say.
 
G

Golfx

Full Audioholic
Atmos is the equivalent of my 30 year old Coleman Lantern. I've got to pump and pump and pump to finally get it to fire up. Atmos is like that I think, interested parties pumping and pumping it up with hope that it will catch fire. I thought Apple Music's Spatial Audio might be good kindling and maybe it is but unless you've already got an Atmos system to enjoy Spatial Audio as you would stereo music from speakers there's just too much expense and too little promise that the experience will be justified. For me, it appears I can get a bit of surround sound from Spatial Audio via connection of an Apple TV to my OPPO, which hands off 5.1 to a 22 year old analog preamp. But even though I can get this means to music operating for less than $200 I have had no motivation to do so because I have not yet seen a Spatial Audio tune from Apple Music that has been compelling enough to want to indulge in it. So for now I am still a 5.1 SACD kind of guy.
I enjoyed reading your post—it made me smile in a good way.

I have a 7.2.4 system so i have an investment bias to support.

I was so so on atmos music recordings that is until i heard Hans Zimmer: Live in Prague. I was thrilled with the results and it is now my new go to demo for my system. Its best form is more of a blu-ray movie than a music recording. You can get the disk from amazon and play it on your oppo.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
It's very simple. If you are fortunate enough to have easy access to ceiling speakers (have easy access to attics), having an ATMOS system can increase the fun factor/entertainment.

If you are not fortunate enough to have easy access to an ATMOS install, then you can still enjoy the traditional 5.1/7.1 systems.
 
C

caustic386

Audioholic Intern
I think the safest answer is to get the “best you can afford” with the best bass and DYNAMICS even if the surround/height usually don’t have much of any bass below 80Hz.

Dynamics mean playing louder without distorting. So bigger better quality drivers usually = more dynamics, which is probably more important than just playing below 80Hz.

I have heard “bass from the ceiling speakers”. I would guess the bass is probably from 80-400Hz or 100-400Hz.

For example, my ceiling ATMOS speakers all have 1” Aluminum Tweeter and 8” Aluminum Woofer.
It occurred to me I could simply test this - I set bass management on my 7350 sub to 50Hz, disconnected all cables and reconnected surround/height one at a time. I used Run The Jewels' - DDFH since it's probably a little bass heavy, and I was pretty surprised at how much was coming out of the sub as I swapped each input. So, I guess it's exactly like you say, even for such a minimal amount of content better speakers (if possible) are warranted.
 
William Lemmerhirt

William Lemmerhirt

Audioholic Warlord
It occurred to me I could simply test this - I set bass management on my 7350 sub to 50Hz, disconnected all cables and reconnected surround/height one at a time. I used Run The Jewels' - DDFH since it's probably a little bass heavy, and I was pretty surprised at how much was coming out of the sub as I swapped each input. So, I guess it's exactly like you say, even for such a minimal amount of content better speakers (if possible) are warranted.
Imo they are warranted, as long as they’re within your means. Atmos speakers can receive full range signals so why not get capable speakers?
 
C

caustic386

Audioholic Intern
Imo they are warranted, as long as they’re within your means. Atmos speakers can receive full range signals so why not get capable speakers?
Fair Q; it's important to remember my use case, though. If you're not familiar with Auro upmixing, such a small amount of sound comes out of surround/heights that I sometimes forget to turn them on and don't even realize it (active monitors). so, the price/performance ratio needs a little adjustment (or so I thought until yesterday)

Dynamics mean playing louder without distorting. So bigger better quality drivers usually = more dynamics, which is probably more important than just playing below 80Hz.
When I first got into this hobby, 'dynamics' were often touted (by salesmen, of course) as a property of amplifiers. Thankfully the evidence-based community has grown, but I think this particular trait still lacks a bit of clarity. What spec would you recommend to flesh out 'dynamics' in a speaker? Once it was explained to me I could easily hear it in my 708p's and 226Be's, even moreso than larger similar-priced R11s, but if I'm honest with myself there's nothing I can point to on the spec sheets and say "there it is."
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
What spec would you recommend to flesh out 'dynamics' in a speaker? Once it was explained to me I could easily hear it in my 708p's and 226Be's, even moreso than larger similar-priced R11s, but if I'm honest with myself there's nothing I can point to on the spec sheets and say "there it is."
I would look at 2 things - bigger SIZE of the drivers (8" vs 5") and higher SENSITIVITY (92dB/w/m vs 82dB/w/m).

The saying "No Replacement for Displacement" applies.

One of the things I've learned from Gene (Audioholics) is that he loves BIG and HIGH QUALITY DRIVERS. The bigger the drivers/speakers, the more DYNAMICS (Displacement).

Some people will design SMALL speakers to play LOWER BASS, but this will reduce speaker sensitivity. So just because the specs say LOWER BASS does not mean more dynamics.

So bigger size and higher sensitivity.
 
A

ArcamAVR

Audiophyte
I just wanted to ask to see if I’m the only one or not who finds this to be an issue. I’m currently running an Arcam AVR30 which when listening to Dolby surround upmixed stereo content now has Center Spread forced on by default. I appreciate that this is great for music, however most of Sky (the biggest satellite stb provider in the uk) content is PCM/DD 2.0 which means most programs now sound horrible with the dialogue going to the LRC channels. Also old DVD’s and movies have 2.0 tracks and it the same for those. Seeing how most AVR’s especially expensive high end ones are used or designed to be used for Movies/TV rather than music, the forced centre spread has ruined this for me. The only options are, stereo and miss out on surround, Dolby Movie post processing which sounds terrible, or DTS:Neural which is heavily centre focused and surround processing is poor in comparison to Dolby surround upmixer. Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?
 
M

Movie2099

Audioholic General
I just wanted to ask to see if I’m the only one or not who finds this to be an issue. I’m currently running an Arcam AVR30 which when listening to Dolby surround upmixed stereo content now has Center Spread forced on by default. I appreciate that this is great for music, however most of Sky (the biggest satellite stb provider in the uk) content is PCM/DD 2.0 which means most programs now sound horrible with the dialogue going to the LRC channels. Also old DVD’s and movies have 2.0 tracks and it the same for those. Seeing how most AVR’s especially expensive high end ones are used or designed to be used for Movies/TV rather than music, the forced centre spread has ruined this for me. The only options are, stereo and miss out on surround, Dolby Movie post processing which sounds terrible, or DTS:Neural which is heavily centre focused and surround processing is poor in comparison to Dolby surround upmixer. Anyone have any thoughts or suggestions?
Never used an Arcam before but think they're nice looking AVR/AVP's. I would turn off all processing/upmixing. Find in your settings some "decoding" options so everything passes through with original sound codecs. The player will then show what sound format is used on the source. You should be able to turn the the center spread option off.
 
AcuDefTechGuy

AcuDefTechGuy

Audioholic Jedi
Gene will be talking about implications of the Auro3D bankruptcy on YT.

I guess I should have called this thread "Dolby Atmos and DTSX" if Auro3D is dead.

 
Last edited:

Latest posts

newsletter

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