AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
I just watched the 2 short DTSX demos/trailers. They totally suck compared to the Atmos demos.
Way to go DTS.
Way to go DTS.
"Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans"
William Lemmerhirt
Audioholic Overlord
Lol. I put a bunch on a thumb drive. Dts ones were mkv and froze my player after about 10 seconds. Every time...
The amaze demo though... holy $hit my subs haven’t seen that much excursion for awhile! The other mp4 demos that worked were pretty sweet too but until my new uhd player shows up I’ll just use the few that worked.
Watched john wick again in atmos. It’s just damn good. Hopefully I can go through my collection soon.
Watched the resident(broadcast channel on dish)in dtsu last night. I was surprised at some of the overhead stuff. It was actually pretty fun.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
Really? I found the Object Emulator works well. Seamlessly pans around the room hitting all the speaker locations. Out of the box has a similar feel to the baseball glass in Shattered.
Agreed, I do seem to remember Dts doing a better job with the demos back in the 90s and early 2Ks
There must be some demos out there somewhere they use to pitch to clients.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
The room is not that big to start with
At least there is still a MLP I can fit into.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
Well okay, the DTS Emulator was pretty cool for like 30 seconds.Really? I found the Object Emulator works well. Seamlessly pans around the room hitting all the speaker locations. Out of the box has a similar feel to the baseball glass in Shattered.
Agreed, I do seem to remember Dts doing a better job with the demos back in the 90s and early 2Ks
But as a whole and when compared to the great Atmos demo trailers, it seems insufficient.
It’s like watching 30 minutes of great Atmos demos and then watching 30 seconds of DTS demos. And then you say, “What, that’s it, that’s all you got?”
It makes me think DTS doesn’t have enough money to make enough great demos.
I’ll watch the 2 DTS demos again today, but it seems the Out of the Box demo was really weak.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
Just watch a Harry Potter (almost any of them) in DTS:X. Best demo for X ever....
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
They are still pretty good on the up mix too.
Is there still a serious black crush, starts with I think Prisoner or Goblet? You see it most in the wood panels or the main door at Hogwarts. It is there on the Blurays, HD Dvds and perhaps the Dvds, although it has been years since I looked at those.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
I don't think I pay much attention to black crush. I'm pickier about audio than video. It would probably have to be severe for me to notice. Things like blocking or really heavy grain (Ghostbusters 4K) would bother me more than a bit of unimportant details in shadow areas.
Given projector black levels typically suck, I'd be thrilled to see more black in some movies...more like charcoal crush sometimes than black. The fast iris mode makes a big difference, but sometimes dims in scenes I'd prefer it didn't as it can look like a flicker when it can't make up its mind. I think maybe I should have gone for a silver screen instead.
Given projector black levels typically suck, I'd be thrilled to see more black in some movies...more like charcoal crush sometimes than black. The fast iris mode makes a big difference, but sometimes dims in scenes I'd prefer it didn't as it can look like a flicker when it can't make up its mind. I think maybe I should have gone for a silver screen instead.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
Thanks for the update.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
So the existing 7.1.4 setup consists of
Yamaha 5100 11.2 Processor
Nad M27 7 Channel amp
Marantz 6012 9.2 amp, 4 of which are used for Heights
SVS PB12/2 Ultra
A setup I must confess I enjoy enormously already, and with which have no real problems, beyond neatness and height placements. Regardless...
This left 5 unused amps, something which unnecessarily nagged at me. Of course prior to adding the 4 Heights, I also thought this was entirely pointless upgrade. Foolishly spurred on by the likes Andy, Magnum and others, I thought to move to a 7.1.6 setup. The original idea, which was entirely mistaken, was to use a pair of the Height/Overheads and extract the content from the supplied Height channels, connected via the 7.1 Multi Channel Inputs. As I found out, trying to overlay any of the up mixers on the MCI is not an option and resulted in silence on all the channels. There may still be a way round this, however I have yet to find it.
One option would have been to use an Hdmi splitter and send the entire signal from the Media PC to both the Yamaha and Marantz. The PC's video output only has one Hdmi port and 3 display ports and PCs only support one active Hdmi audio port at a time. Using the Hdmi Outputs on the Yamaha or the Marantz instead unfortunately converts the audio down to a stereo pair if the device is active. Full pass-thru only works when they are in standby.
The solution I have gone with, which works, uses the existing Yamaha pre-outs into a mini mixer, the passive Rolls MX42, the same one I believe Magnum uses. The mini mixer has 8 inputs and 2 output, arranged in stereo pairs. Since the Nad uses the XLR connections the RCA pre-outs were still available. Input for the mini mixer is the Main LR and Surrounds to provide a wide LR pair. The Wide output from the mini mixer goes to the Surround inputs of the MCI, Front Heights to Main LR and Rear Heights to the BS. This arrangement allows for the 9.1.4 setup for the Yamaha and also a nice 6.0.0 setup for the Marantz to run the Roku, Radio, Android box. The Roku and Android could easily be on the Yamaha, there are more than enough inputs, it is just easier to just only turn on the Marantz for this sort of stuff.
Levels were checked and adjusted first on the Marantz and then on the Yamaha. Overall the balance seems pretty close now, I may still need increase the output volume on the Marantz for the wides as it is hard to accurately judge the levels from the Yamaha, since the test tones for the Front LR and Surrounds also play out the Wides as well.
Result, well it works, and part of the aim with 9.1.4 was to bridge/fill the gap between the Fronts and Surrounds. Going forward other options are still available either to use the mixer to add a mid overhead pair instead of wides. Use a splitter and move to either 7.1.6 or even 7.1.8 and other mad ideas.
So far we have checked out
The Atmos/Dts:X demos
and some scenes from
Ready Player One (Atmos)
Valerian (Atmos)
The Mummy (Atmos)
Kong Skull Island (Atmos)
Transformers Last knight (Atmos)
Return of Xander Cage (Atmos)
MI: Fallout (Atmos)
Atomic Blonde (Dts:X)
Crimson Peak (Dts:X)
Pitch Perfect 3 (Dts:X)
Jason Bourne (Dts:X)
From this what I have noticed most is how it brings fronts more into the room (depth) and improves the side and cross pans from front to back and vice versa. I can understand now why some people have always liked using wides and it is something of a shame Marantz dropped this particularly from the 6012. I think overall it is a good enough improvement that it will be sticking around for a while.
Yamaha 5100 11.2 Processor
Nad M27 7 Channel amp
Marantz 6012 9.2 amp, 4 of which are used for Heights
SVS PB12/2 Ultra
A setup I must confess I enjoy enormously already,
and with which have no real problems, beyond neatness and height placements. Regardless...This left 5 unused amps, something which unnecessarily nagged at me.
Of course prior to adding the 4 Heights, I also thought this was entirely pointless upgrade. Foolishly spurred on by the likes Andy, Magnum and others, I thought to move to a 7.1.6 setup. The original idea, which was entirely mistaken, was to use a pair of the Height/Overheads and extract the content from the supplied Height channels, connected via the 7.1 Multi Channel Inputs. As I found out, trying to overlay any of the up mixers on the MCI is not an option and resulted in silence on all the channels. There may still be a way round this, however I have yet to find it. One option would have been to use an Hdmi splitter and send the entire signal from the Media PC to both the Yamaha and Marantz. The PC's video output only has one Hdmi port and 3 display ports and PCs only support one active Hdmi audio port at a time. Using the Hdmi Outputs on the Yamaha or the Marantz instead unfortunately converts the audio down to a stereo pair if the device is active. Full pass-thru only works when they are in standby.
The solution I have gone with, which works, uses the existing Yamaha pre-outs into a mini mixer, the passive Rolls MX42, the same one I believe Magnum uses. The mini mixer has 8 inputs and 2 output, arranged in stereo pairs. Since the Nad uses the XLR connections the RCA pre-outs were still available. Input for the mini mixer is the Main LR and Surrounds to provide a wide LR pair. The Wide output from the mini mixer goes to the Surround inputs of the MCI, Front Heights to Main LR and Rear Heights to the BS. This arrangement allows for the 9.1.4 setup for the Yamaha and also a nice 6.0.0 setup for the Marantz to run the Roku, Radio, Android box.
The Roku and Android could easily be on the Yamaha, there are more than enough inputs, it is just easier to just only turn on the Marantz for this sort of stuff.Levels were checked and adjusted first on the Marantz and then on the Yamaha. Overall the balance seems pretty close now, I may still need increase the output volume on the Marantz for the wides as it is hard to accurately judge the levels from the Yamaha, since the test tones for the Front LR and Surrounds also play out the Wides as well.
Result, well it works, and part of the aim with 9.1.4 was to bridge/fill the gap between the Fronts and Surrounds. Going forward other options are still available either to use the mixer to add a mid overhead pair instead of wides. Use a splitter and move to either 7.1.6 or even 7.1.8 and other mad ideas.
So far we have checked out
The Atmos/Dts:X demos
and some scenes from
Ready Player One (Atmos)
Valerian (Atmos)
The Mummy (Atmos)
Kong Skull Island (Atmos)
Transformers Last knight (Atmos)
Return of Xander Cage (Atmos)
MI: Fallout (Atmos)
Atomic Blonde (Dts:X)
Crimson Peak (Dts:X)
Pitch Perfect 3 (Dts:X)
Jason Bourne (Dts:X)
From this what I have noticed most is how it brings fronts more into the room (depth) and improves the side and cross pans from front to back and vice versa. I can understand now why some people have always liked using wides
and it is something of a shame Marantz dropped this particularly from the 6012. I think overall it is a good enough improvement that it will be sticking around for a while.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
I use the Rolls MX51S active mixer (three of them).I've got an MX42 here, but the output is pretty low from a passive mixer so I stopped using it. I partially set the levels for the wides by sitting in the left front seat and running Dolby Digital 5.1/6.1 demos. The side mix was set "correct" for me when the "left surround" tone was off to my left instead of either behind me or in front of me (as the wides are in front of and just to the left of that seat and the surrounds behind that seat). The L/R level on the mixer for the wides was set as much as I could put it without screwing up the panned dialog in Toy Story 2 (from MLP).
I keep thinking about getting some more Pro Logic processors and making more "discrete" wides by extracing a steered "center" for the wides instead of the matrixed wides that still leave the front/sides playing all the in-phase info too. The latter has some advantages, especially for my rear wides as it acts like an array for older material for the 2nd/3rd rows giving a similar surround perspective as the front row for the second row and the second row for the 3rd while still imaging in-between for newer material. Discrete gives a fixed perspective (the bird in the "Amaze" demo will fly through each speaker no matter where you sit). For wides, it's harder to say. "Stereo" sounds better with matrixed, I think as it partially cancels side wall reflections out while widening and hardening the width of the soundstage, but discrete anchors the sound for every off-center seat better than matrixed. From the MLP, it doesn't really need discrete and you lose the "enhanced stereo depth/width" effect, IMO.
I further add in front heights from the L/C/R channels (input those three plus front height through another Rolls mixer) to give it a "dialog lift" effect so the sounds come from the screen instead of below the screen (L/R inputs adjust L/R "height" and center input adjusts the center height and the actual front height can be adjusted independently for the real height effects). In stereo mode, I think this further cancels some height reflections (it's so CLEAR sounding when identical drivers are used) and since they're at a slightly different depth, I think it gives it even more "depth" to the soundstage between the wides further in front and the heights slightly behind (it sounds closer to my Carver dipole speakers; in fact, I think now is the first time since I lived in this house I actually like stereo music as well in the home theater as upstairs with the Carvers. This effect should be easy enough for you to try/experiment with since you're already sending heights out to another AVR. Just put the mixer in-between and send it's output to the front height input on the second one instead. Voila. Better stereo and a dialog lift option.
I then use a 3rd unit to do "rear wides" (speakers between side surrounds and rears) the same way front wides are done. Again, this really improves the 2nd/3rd row surround imaging, IMO and Auro-3D sounds better as well when using "extracted top middle" with it since the side surrounds can now image further back into the room towards the rear heights.
I keep thinking about getting some more Pro Logic processors and making more "discrete" wides by extracing a steered "center" for the wides instead of the matrixed wides that still leave the front/sides playing all the in-phase info too. The latter has some advantages, especially for my rear wides as it acts like an array for older material for the 2nd/3rd rows giving a similar surround perspective as the front row for the second row and the second row for the 3rd while still imaging in-between for newer material. Discrete gives a fixed perspective (the bird in the "Amaze" demo will fly through each speaker no matter where you sit). For wides, it's harder to say. "Stereo" sounds better with matrixed, I think as it partially cancels side wall reflections out while widening and hardening the width of the soundstage, but discrete anchors the sound for every off-center seat better than matrixed. From the MLP, it doesn't really need discrete and you lose the "enhanced stereo depth/width" effect, IMO.
I further add in front heights from the L/C/R channels (input those three plus front height through another Rolls mixer) to give it a "dialog lift" effect so the sounds come from the screen instead of below the screen (L/R inputs adjust L/R "height" and center input adjusts the center height and the actual front height can be adjusted independently for the real height effects). In stereo mode, I think this further cancels some height reflections (it's so CLEAR sounding when identical drivers are used) and since they're at a slightly different depth, I think it gives it even more "depth" to the soundstage between the wides further in front and the heights slightly behind (it sounds closer to my Carver dipole speakers; in fact, I think now is the first time since I lived in this house I actually like stereo music as well in the home theater as upstairs with the Carvers. This effect should be easy enough for you to try/experiment with since you're already sending heights out to another AVR. Just put the mixer in-between and send it's output to the front height input on the second one instead. Voila. Better stereo and a dialog lift option.
I then use a 3rd unit to do "rear wides" (speakers between side surrounds and rears) the same way front wides are done. Again, this really improves the 2nd/3rd row surround imaging, IMO and Auro-3D sounds better as well when using "extracted top middle" with it since the side surrounds can now image further back into the room towards the rear heights.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
Fortunately I don't have three rows to worry about, visitors get the cheap seats, this is all about me.
The MX42 is listed at -12dB down (unclear if it is per input or overall) and if you can't add gain to that then it would perhaps be a problem. Fortunately both the Yamaha and Marantz allow for this adjustment both on the input and output. Definitely no one should be using just Y cables to do this. Interestingly the MX42 is also capable of the reverse, providing 1 in and 4 out pairs. Suitable matrix mixers are quite rare and often people resort to creating their own.
Auro is not an option for me alas, as it only available on the models above the 6012 although it would have been nice if they had retained the Wide option.
The MX42 is listed at -12dB down (unclear if it is per input or overall) and if you can't add gain to that then it would perhaps be a problem. Fortunately both the Yamaha and Marantz allow for this adjustment both on the input and output. Definitely no one should be using just Y cables to do this. Interestingly the MX42 is also capable of the reverse, providing 1 in and 4 out pairs. Suitable matrix mixers are quite rare and often people resort to creating their own.
Auro is not an option for me alas, as it only available on the models above the 6012 although it would have been nice if they had retained the Wide option.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
I could get sufficient volume, but the noise floor was higher (much quieter using the active mixer). I still recommend trying dialog lift some time if you get bored. It's great for centering the dialog on the screen.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
I saw “KIN” in DTSX today. I thought the sound was pretty good.
I also skimmed through “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” in DTSX. I was very impressed with the sound.
I can’t believe it. DTSX sound can be great.
I also skimmed through “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2” in DTSX. I was very impressed with the sound.
I can’t believe it. DTSX sound can be great.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
Other than Jumanji (original), I think some of the Harry Potters have some of the most impressive immersive sound I've ever heard. Yeah, Overlord was great the other day, but Harry Potter has so many places overhead sounds make sense (flying brooms, flying cars, trees attacking overhead, clock gongs, wand zaps, etc.) plus it doesn't hurt that they're some of my favorite series movies (characters are great in them). It's not the format, though, it's the mix. I've only got one movie I can compare in DTS:X versus Atmos and that's Jurassic Park Fallen Kingdom (good mix, but not the greatest by any measure, IMO). I think you'll find they sound identical on a 7.1.4 type system.
I still have to watch a newer Fast & Furious movie with crazy stunts. They probably have some overhead sounds. The original really didn't have overhead things going on much (was great on ground level, though).
I have noticed lately that Neural X really likes to put movie soundtracks on or near the ceiling.... I do have my ceiling speakers adjusted like 1dB above bed level, though (gives them slightly more presence in movies that often use lower levels on overheads for some stupid reason). Really, I wouldn't blame people for cranking them 3-4dB higher for that very reason. The only problem is that can "raise" the height of in-between objects above the intended height, but the on-ceiling stuff is so much more noticeable.
I still have to watch a newer Fast & Furious movie with crazy stunts. They probably have some overhead sounds. The original really didn't have overhead things going on much (was great on ground level, though).
I have noticed lately that Neural X really likes to put movie soundtracks on or near the ceiling.... I do have my ceiling speakers adjusted like 1dB above bed level, though (gives them slightly more presence in movies that often use lower levels on overheads for some stupid reason). Really, I wouldn't blame people for cranking them 3-4dB higher for that very reason. The only problem is that can "raise" the height of in-between objects above the intended height, but the on-ceiling stuff is so much more noticeable.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
It would not be boredom, I have no need of it. My centre is not obstructed and is located at ear level, betwixt the projector above and the Tv below.
Perceived Dialog positioning has never been an issue with either. I can understand the usage case for yourself with multiple rows to consider. People absorb a lot of sound and it's one of the reasons I like to visit the cinema at odd times to minimize the body count The others being packet rustling, munching and chattering.I can’t believe it. DTSX sound can be great.
From Fast Five onwards it does get pretty crazy. Fate of the Furious is in Dts:X on bluray.
Last night we watched Jack Reacher Never Go Back (Atmos) and Jason Bourne (Dts:X) with the new setup. Neither previously rated highly as audio standouts. It is odd and kind of hard to describe but both seemed improved in both the base layer and the overhead. This could just be wishful thinking, paying more attention or my advancing years and poor recall. It does seem to bring out/separate detail out from the front pair more and cars/trucks passing in the foreground seem better located in 3D. How this helps with the overhead I don't know, beyond any speaker interactions that may be occurring in the room.
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
I only skimmed through Deathly Hallows Part 2, but the DTSX sound was amazing.
If all the Potter movies in DTSX sound this great, I will have to re-watch them all.
Bookmark
Full Audioholic
Hallows Part 2 is definitely the more entertaining of the two, the first is really just a setup. It is by all accounts a fairly hefty tomb and splitting into two was probably a wise choice. Not from a Dts:X point, but even up mixed there can be a good deal going on, the Quidditch matches are pretty good.If all the Potter movies in DTSX sound this great, I will have to re-watch them all.
Is this a turn to The Dts:X Dark Side, feel the Heights, release your anger.
Interesting up mix, very nice. The Golden Compass (2007) based off the novel series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman.
The film itself is somewhat flawed and they possibly had envisioned a Potter like franchise which never came to pass. Now in the process of filming the complete series with the BBC (co-production) due out later this year. HBO I think for the US.https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0385752/
AcuDefTechGuy
Audioholic Jedi
It just means there is hope for DTSX.Hallows Part 2 is definitely the more entertaining of the two, the first is really just a setup. It is by all accounts a fairly hefty tomb and splitting into two was probably a wise choice. Not from a Dts:X point, but even up mixed there can be a good deal going on, the Quidditch matches are pretty good.
Is this a turn to The Dts:X Dark Side, feel the Heights, release your anger.
Interesting up mix, very nice. The Golden Compass (2007) based off the novel series His Dark Materials by Philip Pullman.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0385752/
Hopefully the DTSX sound mixers will continue to match the efforts on Dealthy Hallows Part 2.
Atmos 28 ponts, DTSX 3 points, 3rd Quarter.
Let's see if DTSX can mount a miraculous comeback like The NE Patriots.
VonMagnum
Audioholic Chief
The first three Potter movies had fantastic DTS:X sound as well (Philosopher/Sorcerer Stone, Chamber of Secrets and Azkaban). Well they all did, but Deathly Hallows part one lacked action period.
Sitemap
Site Information
Site Information
HTML
