klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,742
|
Post by klinemj on Nov 24, 2018 9:31:29 GMT -5
Good - then you have nothing to worry about re. the RMC-1. Mark nope. and neither do you I may get one, but I am leaning more to the XMC-2. Mark
|
|
|
Post by jjkessler on Nov 24, 2018 10:08:59 GMT -5
Starting to rethink if I even want to go down the Atmos path at all anymore. I really am quite happy with my XMC-1 in a 7.2 layout. Might just sell my four extra XPA-1L and invest in the 4K projector and call it a day
|
|
|
Post by Geronimo on Nov 24, 2018 16:01:13 GMT -5
Starting to rethink if I even want to go down the Atmos path at all anymore. I really am quite happy with my XMC-1 in a 7.2 layout. Might just sell my four extra XPA-1L and invest in the 4K projector and call it a day Atmos sounds pretty good. I personally haven't invested much money on the height amplification. I'm just using a Crown 1502, and a 2502 just for my 4 heights. My other channels get the high end amps, but yeah, Atmos sounds great for sure. Just as you say, I do think HDR and 4K make a bigger impact.
|
|
|
Post by petew on Nov 24, 2018 18:55:42 GMT -5
Starting to rethink if I even want to go down the Atmos path at all anymore. I really am quite happy with my XMC-1 in a 7.2 layout. Might just sell my four extra XPA-1L and invest in the 4K projector and call it a day I'm starting to doubt getting an emotiva processor unless the RMC-1 gets dialed in pretty quickly and the XMC-2 is released soon and without drama. Antham AVm 60 is looking pretty attractive.
|
|
Lsc
Emo VIPs
Posts: 3,342
Member is Online
|
Post by Lsc on Nov 25, 2018 11:49:45 GMT -5
Starting to rethink if I even want to go down the Atmos path at all anymore. I really am quite happy with my XMC-1 in a 7.2 layout. Might just sell my four extra XPA-1L and invest in the 4K projector and call it a day Atmos sounds pretty good. I personally haven't invested much money on the height amplification. I'm just using a Crown 1502, and a 2502 just for my 4 heights. My other channels get the high end amps, but yeah, Atmos sounds great for sure. Just as you say, I do think HDR and 4K make a bigger impact. I agree. The pain that it takes to get Atmos done properly, I decided to go watch the movies I want to see in Atmos at the theaters.
|
|
|
Post by musicfan on Nov 25, 2018 12:22:37 GMT -5
yeah....pain to build a house....guess ill just stay in a hotel instead
c'mon....setup is a one time thing...do it and enjoy...same as anything else
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Nov 25, 2018 16:16:30 GMT -5
yeah....pain to build a house....guess ill just stay in a hotel instead c'mon....setup is a one time thing...do it and enjoy...same as anything else Lol. Depending on the homebuilder........ I know there were times I had second thoughts!
|
|
|
Post by seraphic on Nov 25, 2018 21:48:14 GMT -5
Correct....
We never promised to do anything beyond "look into" Auro 3D.
The simple reality is that there is very little interest in Auro 3D here in the USA. (So, unless there is a major increase in that level of interest, we will probably not consider including it as an option.)
The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US. Without going into the details, the new requirements essentially say that, from now onwards..... You may NOT use the Auro upmixer in conjunction with ANY Dolby Digital encoded content. You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer with Dolby Atmos content... You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer to synthesize height channels for Dolby Digital or Dolby TrueHD content... (Neither we, not any other Dolby licensee, are permitted to offer either of those options on any equipment we sell going forward.)
(In equipment that offers it, you may still use the Auro upmixer with stereo content, or content that originates as multi-channel PCM or multi-channel analog.)
Dan never promised Auro period. He did say he would look into the feasibility of it being an add-on but that was it.
Wouldn't "The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US." be a violation of United States antitrust/competition law and thus illegal?
Anyway, I think what myself and other people are interested in when it comes to Auro3D is not so much content encoded on their format, but access to the Auro-matic Upmixer. It supposedly does a much better job up-mixing stereo 2.0 content then both the DSU or DTSX upmixers. Couldn't Emotiva offer an Auro3D/Auro-matic upgrade package to the RMC 1/2 for say $50 or $100? Choice is good and I know I would upgrade. Let users try all three upmixers: Auro-matic, DSU and DTSX to see which works best for our content. Dolby shouldn't be allowed to deter use of DTS or Auro and gain monopolization. My two cents.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Nov 25, 2018 22:08:50 GMT -5
Correct.... We never promised to do anything beyond "look into" Auro 3D. The simple reality is that there is very little interest in Auro 3D here in the USA. (So, unless there is a major increase in that level of interest, we will probably not consider including it as an option.) The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US.div]Without going into the details, the new requirements essentially say that, from now onwards.....You may NOT use the Auro upmixer in conjunction with ANY Dolby Digital encoded content. You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer with Dolby Atmos content...You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer to synthesize height channels for Dolby Digital or Dolby TrueHD content...(Neither we, not any other Dolby licensee, are permitted to offer either of those options on any equipment we sell going forward.)
(In equipment that offers it, you may still use the Auro upmixer with stereo content, or content that originates as multi-channel PCM or multi-channel analog.) Wouldn't "The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US." be a violation of United States antitrust/competition law and thus illegal? Dolby is not targeting Auro specifically, they simply don't want any upmixers (except their own) being used to synthesise more channels (speakers) than are on the disc. The DTS upmixer (Neural) is their primary target as it does great job of upmixing. The DTS algorithm is currently way more effective (less fake sounding) than Dolby's own. Dolby's "excuse" is that they don't want people playing with the sound output that Atmos produces. They run the spin that the movie sound engineer/mixer used Atmos to get the sound that they want and we shouldn't play with it. Problem is they then provide their own upmixer, Ooooops, liar liar pants on fire. FWIW I prefer Neural to Auro for upmixing 7.1.4 Atmos to more channels, however both are superior to Dolby's surround upmixer. Auro is really good for multi channel music eg; SACD's. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Nov 26, 2018 1:22:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by thrillcat on Nov 26, 2018 8:35:50 GMT -5
[Wouldn't "The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US." be a violation of United States antitrust/competition law and thus illegal? I think, to fall into antitrust/competition law, they would have to claim “no product that contains Dolby can contain another competing system”. Just saying you can’t play Dolby content on their decoding system is completely fair. You can’t play XBOX games on a PlayStation.
|
|
Lonnie
Emo Staff
admin
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain
Posts: 6,999
|
Post by Lonnie on Nov 26, 2018 9:19:18 GMT -5
This is just my .02 but the Dolby system actually uses Cartesian coordinates to place objects in space and move them around. I really don't understand how a derived surround up mixer would sound better. But I guess its all about personal preference.
Lonnie
|
|
|
Post by Bonzo on Nov 26, 2018 9:50:39 GMT -5
This is just my .02 but the Dolby system actually uses Cartesian coordinates to place objects in space and move them around. I really don't understand how a derived surround up mixer would sound better. But I guess its all about personal preference. Lonnie I think what you say makes perfect sense, logically speaking, but for what ever reason, might not necessarily hold true in reality. I say this based on my past findings. In my system, in my room, with my set up, DTS Master always sounds better than Dolby True. In fact, DTS Master 5.1 sounds better than Dolby True 7.1. On the Blade Runner 2049 Blu-ray, the Atmos soundtrack (played on my non-Atmos system, hence it should have been Dolby True 7.1), sounded much lesser compared to the DTS-Master 5.1 version. I know that you are talking real object based vs upmixed. On paper object based should win hands down. All I'm saying is that DTS systems always sound better to me, so in theory, its possible a DTS upmixed sound track could sound better than Dolby Atmos. I have no idea why DTS always sounds superior, but it does at my house.
|
|
|
Post by bradford on Nov 26, 2018 10:05:10 GMT -5
Correct....
We never promised to do anything beyond "look into" Auro 3D.
The simple reality is that there is very little interest in Auro 3D here in the USA. (So, unless there is a major increase in that level of interest, we will probably not consider including it as an option.)
The new Dolby licensing restrictions are also destined to reduce the market penetration of Auro 3D into the US. Without going into the details, the new requirements essentially say that, from now onwards..... You may NOT use the Auro upmixer in conjunction with ANY Dolby Digital encoded content. You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer with Dolby Atmos content... You MAY NOT use the Auro upmixer to synthesize height channels for Dolby Digital or Dolby TrueHD content... (Neither we, not any other Dolby licensee, are permitted to offer either of those options on any equipment we sell going forward.)
(In equipment that offers it, you may still use the Auro upmixer with stereo content, or content that originates as multi-channel PCM or multi-channel analog.)
Dan never promised Auro period. He did say he would look into the feasibility of it being an add-on but that was it.
The Dolby restriction does not impact most legacy Blu-ray and DVD (to a lesser extent) movies as the majority have DTS encoding. It also has little impact on two channel and multi-channel music audio/video recordings as few are only available with a Dolby codec. Many people with large libraries of both may be willing to pay for the option.
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Nov 26, 2018 10:06:05 GMT -5
This is just my .02 but the Dolby system actually uses Cartesian coordinates to place objects in space and move them around. I really don't understand how a derived surround up mixer would sound better. But I guess its all about personal preference. Lonnie The way in which Dolby now words it perplexes me. They say that, with Atmos, the DSU will "honor the mixing engineer's intent". But we now see that it has become a trend (when disclosed) that Atmos mixes are "pinned" at 7.1.4. Without the use of an upmixer, what happens to the additional two "height" channels in a 7.1.6 system...? I assume that if Dolby is true to their word, only 4 of the 6 height channels are utilized. I should have followed the many pages of discussion in this thread more closely, but at that time, I thought Emotiva's "proprietary" upmixer would take care of it. I have not yet taken the Atmos plunge, but it may be next on my list. So, without having to backtrack, the short answer is what...?
|
|
|
Post by deewan on Nov 26, 2018 12:45:07 GMT -5
I realize not everyone who purchased a RMC follows this thread or even this forum. Do we have any RMC's up and running in the wild? Anyone supposed to get their RMC today? Besides me is there anyone who purchased a RMC back on the 15th and still have not received a tracking number?
EDIT: I just noticed the RMC in the wild thread. Sorry! I should have checked first.
|
|
Mrci10
Seeker Of Truth
Posts: 7
|
Post by Mrci10 on Nov 26, 2018 14:05:09 GMT -5
“Besides me is there anyone who purchased a RMC back on the 15th and still have not received a tracking number?”
I ordered the RMC-1 at 12:15 am central on the 15th. I’ve not received a tracking number yet. Although I’d like to receive it sooner rather than later, I’m so busy at work now I’d have little time to devote to a proper calibration.
I’m using an Anthem D2V, and it’s calibrated perfectly and sounds exceptional. I’d hate to rip it out during the holidays with all the family, friends and colleagues that will be here in the next month, only to have a new processor in place that hasn’t been calibrated the way I know I can do it.
I wouldn’t want to install a new processor until I have time to properly calibrate it.
Mr Chicago Illinois 10
|
|
|
Post by deewan on Nov 26, 2018 14:33:31 GMT -5
Well, I have not received a tracking number yet, but my order page shows my RMC is fulfilled! YIPPIE!!!! I'm guessing tonight I'll get the tracking number email.
|
|
Lonnie
Emo Staff
admin
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain
Posts: 6,999
|
Post by Lonnie on Nov 26, 2018 15:00:07 GMT -5
This is just my .02 but the Dolby system actually uses Cartesian coordinates to place objects in space and move them around. I really don't understand how a derived surround up mixer would sound better. But I guess its all about personal preference. Lonnie The way in which Dolby now words it perplexes me. They say that, with Atmos, the DSU will "honor the mixing engineer's intent". But we now see that it has become a trend (when disclosed) that Atmos mixes are "pinned" at 7.1.4. Without the use of an upmixer, what happens to the additional two "height" channels in a 7.1.6 system...? I assume that if Dolby is true to their word, only 4 of the 6 height channels are utilized. I should have followed the many pages of discussion in this thread more closely, but at that time, I thought Emotiva's "proprietary" upmixer would take care of it. I have not yet taken the Atmos plunge, but it may be next on my list. So, without having to backtrack, the short answer is what...? I think there is a bit of a disconnect here about how all this works. The "Pinned" channels are used for streaming purposes to keep the amount of data to reasonable levels. Theatrical and BluRays are not pinned. Even if a signal is pinned, lets say 7.1.4 and you have a 9.1.6 system, the DSU will take the object channels, run them through the appropriate algorithm and give you 9.1.6. That is what the DSU does. For example. Lets say you are streaming a movie which has x.x.4 Pinned channels. but your actual system has x.x.6 speakers. The system architecture knows you have two additional height channels. The front and back pinned channels are sent to the front and back and the DSU will run the algorithm to move the object from front, to middle to back. In this way they "honor the mixing engineer's intent". I hope this makes since. Lonnie
|
|
|
Post by musicfan on Nov 26, 2018 15:12:19 GMT -5
The way in which Dolby now words it perplexes me. They say that, with Atmos, the DSU will "honor the mixing engineer's intent". But we now see that it has become a trend (when disclosed) that Atmos mixes are "pinned" at 7.1.4. Without the use of an upmixer, what happens to the additional two "height" channels in a 7.1.6 system...? I assume that if Dolby is true to their word, only 4 of the 6 height channels are utilized. I should have followed the many pages of discussion in this thread more closely, but at that time, I thought Emotiva's "proprietary" upmixer would take care of it. I have not yet taken the Atmos plunge, but it may be next on my list. So, without having to backtrack, the short answer is what...? I think there is a bit of a disconnect here about how all this works. The "Pinned" channels are used for streaming purposes to keep the amount of data to reasonable levels. Theatrical and BluRays are not pinned. Even if a signal is pinned, lets say 7.1.4 and you have a 9.1.6 system, the DSU will take the object channels, run them through the appropriate algorithm and give you 9.1.6. That is what the DSU does. For example. Lets say you are streaming a movie which has x.x.4 Pinned channels. but your actual system has x.x.6 speakers. The system architecture knows you have two additional height channels. The front and back pinned channels are sent to the front and back and the DSU will run the algorithm to move the object from front, to middle to back. In this way they "honor the mixing engineer's intent". I hope this makes since. Lonnie this is the first i have EVER heard DSU working on atmos native content.....DSU is an upmixer of non ATMOS content....so your saying this isnt the case?
|
|