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

[VonMagnum]

Yeah, I create Top Middle from a center extract of front/rear height and that lets me duplicate the channels for both Auro-3D and Atmos (my room is only 12' wide, so the side walls are only slightly outward from the front/rear heights and you can't tell at all with the helicopter and other demos that do straight lines along the room; it's just too slight over that length). Without a top middle extract, I'd have a "hole" over the middle of the room where "rain" and things would seem to have thinned out or stopped raining and the helicopter just sort of "jumps" to the front of the room, especially if you're not sitting dead center front-to-back, which none of my seats are anymore) With the extra speakers engaged, everything is just perfectly smooth and consistent again. Lovely.

The best thing is extracted works with DTS:X (no 11-channel limit if you extract the in-between channel) and even works with Auro-3D as well if desired (set rear height instead of surround height and extract in-between). My Monoprice switchbox lets me run Auro-3D either way or with surround height and rear height duplicated (like they do in actual 11.1 theaters). It's hard to pick which one sounds better (some of the images just shift slightly where they appear in the room overhead, really between the three settings; since they're all off-screen, I couldn't tell you which one is "right" just by listening. They all sound good. I'd use strict side surround for quad-miked music, though since it's akin to binaural and having the speakers placed in relation to the mic is important (for movies, far less so with panning, IMO).

 

[snakeeyes]

Hard to invest if only 20 titles on Auro-3D. Maybe if they hit 200 titles it becomes worth a look.

 

[VonMagnum]

I doubt there are even 200 DTS:X titles yet....

Atmos pretty much wins by default. But until movies like Red Tails are available in Atmos or X, I'll gladly keep the Auro-3D version (my AVR already supports it, so it's no more cost to me at this stage to use it). Many also think it's great for upmixing music as it does not yank things into other channels full force like Neural X and half force like DSU.

With PLIIx gone, there's not many good upmixers for music around. It was stupid of Dolby to kill off PLIIx/z when DSU isn't as good for music, IMO. I've also played with modified level multi-channel stereo, but ultimately concluded without PLIIx, I pretty much just prefer regular stereo. I could restore PLIIx with a bit of bother by adding a music source to my Yamaha AVR currently just being used as an amplifier and feeding its RCA outs to the 7CH inputs on my Marantz receiver. That would basically pass-through the Yamaha's PLIIx feed.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

The VOG speaker adds another tracking layer in addition to the front, side, or rear heights.

Atmos has 2 layers - bed and ceiling.

Auro3D has 3 layers - bed, height, and ceiling.

I can see the argument that Auro3D has the advantage because it has 1 extra layer.

I can see Atmos adding a 3rd height layer if Auro3D isn't 6 feet under in a few years - the 4th layer. LOL.

But at the end of the day, I just care about hearing those cool sounds from above regardless of how many layers of sounds there are.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I guess Yamaha never added Auro3D because they didn't think Auro3D would survive the Atmos-storm. So far they are correct since there are no Auro3D blu-rays in the USA.

I wonder how much money it would have cost Yamaha if they had added Auro3D to their AVR since 2013?

I wonder how much longer Denon/Marantz can keep Auro3D in their AVR, especially since they were supposedly hit hard financially?

So as of now, only Denon/Marantz, ATI (Casablanca, ATP-16, DataSAT, and Monoprice HTP-1), and McIntosh support Auro3D.

Yamaha, Sony, Integra, Pioneer, Lexicon, Arcam, NAD, AudioControl and everyone else do not support Auro3D.

 

[VonMagnum]

No format has a "floor" layer yet (give 'em a few years, though). Surface mounted speakers with metal grills on the floor is what I'm thinking. Imagine the Indiana Jones Temple of Doom movie where they are on the rope bridge and hearing the water sounds coming from BELOW you....

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

No format has a "floor" layer yet (give 'em a few years, though). Surface mounted speakers with metal grills on the floor is what I'm thinking. Imagine the Indiana Jones Temple of Doom movie where they are on the rope bridge and hearing the water sounds coming from BELOW you....

Only you and Andyblackcat would think of such things!

 

[Good4it]

Only you and Andyblackcat would think of such things!

MORE SPEAKERS, I need more speakers and wires!

 

[VonMagnum]

MORE SPEAKERS, I need more speakers and wires!

Yeah, people think I was crazy to add rear wides...17 speakers is more than I have in the entire rest of my house and I have whole house audio.

I've been seriously thinking of using a second AVR decoder to do not only discrete front wides, but "top" front/rear as well (having 10 overhead speakers instead of 6 as I already have front/rear heights and top middle extracted between them). That would give the overhead similar angles to the bed layer.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

MORE SPEAKERS, I need more speakers and wires!

17 speakers is more than I have in the entire rest of my mouse...having 10 overhead speakers instead of 6....

I have 3 words - Out of Control.

In the old days, 5 speakers were too many speakers.

Now there's 17-21 speakers???

BTW, I just saw your pictures on AVS.

You and Andyblackcat are CRAZY.

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2321145-beyond-7-1-4-multi-avr-set-up-immersive-audio-54.html#post56799092

 

[VonMagnum]

The Atmos home version is designed for up to 32 speakers (so is DTS:X Pro). Clearly, I'm thinking a high-end example, but some people have money and/or are willing to do the word to build it themselves. The wiring is the worst part, IMO (and mounting speakers on the ceiling, etc.)

 

[TheoN]

The Atmos home version is designed for up to 32 speakers (so is DTS:X Pro). Clearly, I'm thinking a high-end example, but some people have money and/or are willing to do the word to build it themselves. The wiring is the worst part, IMO (and mounting speakers on the ceiling, etc.)

I think guiding users on future proofing is key. If you’re pulling wires, it’s easy to pull more wires. It’s a pain to pull new wires after an installation is done.

I recommend prioritizing 6 in ceiling for a canonical Atmos followed by running cabling for the VOG and lastly front center height.

That configuration should run most setups nicely for years to come and is cross compatible with all the immersive formats.

In a larger theater needing multiple seats I’d certainly recommend 8 or 10 height in the array.

If you think of it the cost of wiring is cheap. Installing those runs and then keeping them in the ceiling is easy and then if and when those channels are needed just add the speaker at that time.

 

[VonMagnum]

Easy my foot.... You do know that some of us don't have homes constructed where we can "easily" move wires through walls and ceilings and some of us are "upgrading" a theater, not building a room. I'd call that after the installation if you want to look at it that way. My home theater room is between floors (no attic to go into to run wires). There was nothing "easy" about "pulling wires" for 17 speakers while trying to retain some semblance of a clean room (still some problem corners here with 15+ wires that need covered/hidden with molding or something. Trying to fish wires up through drill holes in a wall mounted bookcase with an empty space in-between...I wanted to tear my hair out at one point. Hell, putting banana plugs on 68 sets of wires wasn't fun either (two each speaker on that end and 2 more each on the amp end, although I guess it was a few less since I used a switchbox that needed bare wires, but then that needed extra sets too and screwed down with jeweler sets (try not to strip the screws).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think installing ceiling and wall speakers is only “easy” if it’s a brand new construction, especially when you just have the installers do it for you.

For many people with existing homes, installing 2 ceiling speakers might be difficult for them. That’s the biggest reason most people still haven’t jumped into the Atmos bandwagon even when practically every new BD movie is being released in Atmos.

And even then, if you are married, sometimes you have to factor in your wife’s opinion about all those speakers in the ceiling and walls.

 

[panteragstk]

I think installing ceiling and wall speakers is only “easy” if it’s a brand new construction, especially when you just have the installers do it for you.

For many people with existing homes, installing 2 ceiling speakers might be difficult for them. That’s the biggest reason most people still haven’t jumped into the Atmos bandwagon even when practically every new BD movie is being released in Atmos.

And even then, if you are married, sometimes you have to factor in your wife’s opinion about all those speakers in the ceiling and walls.

I've had 4 ceiling speakers in a box in my theater for months just because I don't want to cut 4 5" holes and dirty up the place.

My current "on ceiling" sound great, but the real speakers will be an improvement.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I've had 4 ceiling speakers in a box in my theater for months just because I don't want to cut 4 5" holes and dirty up the place.

So true.

If I could do it all over again from the beginning, I would have my installer install four massive RBH SI-6100/R speakers in the ceiling.

But I am 100% reluctant now when thinking about cutting four huge rectangular holes in the ceiling and all that mess and effort and time.

 

[TheoN]

Easy my foot.... You do know that some of us don't have homes constructed where we can "easily" move wires through walls and ceilings and some of us are "upgrading" a theater, not building a room. I'd call that after the installation if you want to look at it that way. My home theater room is between floors (no attic to go into to run wires). There was nothing "easy" about "pulling wires" for 17 speakers while trying to retain some semblance of a clean room (still some problem corners here with 15+ wires that need covered/hidden with molding or something. Trying to fish wires up through drill holes in a wall mounted bookcase with an empty space in-between...I wanted to tear my hair out at one point. Hell, putting banana plugs on 68 sets of wires wasn't fun either (two each speaker on that end and 2 more each on the amp end, although I guess it was a few less since I used a switchbox that needed bare wires, but then that needed extra sets too and screwed down with jeweler sets (try not to strip the screws).

It’s never easy. But better to deal with the mess once than many times over. I’m sure there’s a good analogy for that

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

It's funny how I forget the stories/plots of movies after 8 years.

I was re-watching "Salt" remastered in Atmos the other night. I couldn't recall the plot. It was almost like watching it for the first time.

And once again, I liked it a lot better this time than the first time.

Overall I thought they used the overhead (OH) speakers often.

Even when there was not a specific sound (helicopters, thunder, rain, etc.) they placed ambient sounds and some musics in the OH speakers quite often.

I don't recall every OH sound, but here are some that I do recall:

Opening scenes in the Korean Prison Cell: Intercom voices and echo sounds

CIA Building: Intercom voices, Alarms, Vertical Sliding Doors, Lights Buzzing, Explosions, more ambient sounds and suspenseful music

Train Station: Intercom voices

Dance Club: Music

Ending scenes: Very Prominent Helicopter Sound

And did I mention ambient sounds and music from overhead, even throughout the entire END CREDITS?

I wouldn't say it's among the best. This movie was made in 2010. So they clearly remixed the sound just for Atmos.

But I would give them an "A" for effort!

Overall, I thought all the overhead sounds were "appropriate" for my taste. Helicopter OH sound at the end was very loud and awesome.

And pretty much every time someone spoke over the OH Intercom, it came out of the ceiling speakers loud and clear.

There were some car chase scenes where they drove under the bridges that they could have used the OH speakers a lot more. Those parts were disappointing compared to the rest of the movie. If they had used the ceiling speakers more every time they went under the bridge, it would have been great.

But when compared to most DTSX and many Atmos movies I've seen, I think "Salt" should be considered a "demo" disc because they made a lot of effort in using the Atmos ceiling speakers.

 

[Bookmark]

Ah but which version, there should actually have been 3 on the disc? The correct version, according to me obvisously, is the Extended cut one where she returned to sort out her mentor, in Russia.

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=660092

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ah but which version, there should actually have been 3 on the disc? The correct version, according to me obvisously, is the Extended cut one where she returned to sort out her mentor, in Russia.

https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=660092

Wow. I didn't realize there were 3 versions of SALT. I only saw the Theatrical Version.