|
Post by cwt on Sept 22, 2019 5:03:45 GMT -5
It sounds like a firmware issue that used to be good so I imagine not to challenging for them. As a speaker expansion thread assuming 20 minimum 11.1 upmixing doesn’t do much good either though. That’s why I’m less concerned about Auro as well unless they release Auromax to home audio. The implementation of DTS Pro is more related to my concerns and getting rid of the Dolby limitation. I imagine a complex firmware rewrite would be needed anyways making any of those current issues irrelevant. Yes ; Not concerned with upmixing object audio as until dolby changes how the atmos decoder treats the metadata its a moot point . The atmos decoder renders and scales to the speakers you have entered . There is no dsp application to be applied unlike the old channel based codecs . The best you can do is duplicate channels like the Lyngdorf MP50 does - they must know something as they have released the 60 a 9.1.6 without the matrixed channels It comes down to the % of tracks with 7.1.4 fixed objects and those who go the extra mile with wides and heights . S Drucker had an early estimate and its up to the individual as to which discs to buy [ and avoid crappy Disney etc ] www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/1574386-official-dolby-atmos-thread-home-theater-version-1647.html#post56100296This limitation of 11chs for DTS-X is why DTS-X PRO is such a must . If its instigated that will give incentive for mixers to go the extra mile ; a classic chicken and egg situation
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 22, 2019 14:21:54 GMT -5
If we are going to do RMC-1 speaker extensions, need to know how to do it. Today, in separate tests, confirmed that: 1. Width speakers work with 4K Mad Max PCM5.1/Dolby_Surround 2. All 6 Heights/Tops Speakers work (including Middle Tops) with 4K Mad Max PCM5.1/Dolby_SurroundWidths Test:1. Only certain ATMOS movies have widths channels. So pick one of those movies to do the test. Some are 2k and some 4k movies. Used 4k ATMOS Mad Max at 00:27:55 tornado scene. Here are 2 links that discuss movies with Width speaker channels: www.avsforum.com/forum/86-ultra-hi-end-ht-gear-20-000/2542897-official-atmos-width-channel-exploiting-thread-7.html#post55018882www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2926740-exploltation-width-speakers-aka-wides.html2. The most surprising thing was RMC-1 automatically switched from Dolby_TrueHD 7.1/ATMOS to PCM 5.1/DD_Surround to do this. Not sure how this happened. Did not change anything. EDIT1: Figured out setting 5.1 Mode to Auto allow this to happen. Only recently chg'd to this setting based on @keithl post on subject ... so, basically the RMC-1 DID automatically chg from ATMOS to PCM5.1/DD_Surround to use Width spkrs. +1 for EMO!EDIT2: EDIT1 above not true, PCM5.1 was a decoding error on RMC-1 front panel ... the sound format was always DD_TrueHD_7.1/ATMOS ... as verified in posts on page 4 of this thread.3. Started with a 7.1.6 config and had to turn off rear speakers and Middle Top speakers in the speaker size menu, then activate the widths, set width speakers to small and width speaker distance to be the same as front speakers. 7.1.4: Fronts, Widths, center, Side Surrounds, Front Heights, Back Heights and Sub. 4. Lots of sound effects and music coming out of width speakers. 6 Heights/Tops Speaker Test: 1. Used 4K Mad Max at same 00:27:55 tornado scene. 2. Turn off width and rear speakers and activated all 6 heights speakers: 5.1.6. Verified all 6 heights speakers were active during tornado scene. 3. RMC-1 automatically switched from Dolby_TrueHD 7.1/ATMOS to PCM 5.1/DD_Surround to do this ... just like in the Width speaker test. 4. Most surprising thing was all six height/top speakers were working ... the ATMOS 7.1.4 restriction is more like 11.1. Got 5.1.6 to work. 5.1.6: Fronts, Center, Side Surrounds, Sub, Front Heights, Middle Tops and Rear Heights. Don't understand this ... but, it works! 5. Tested each Height/Top pair individually to make sure they were activated. The Front Height and Middle Heights had the most activity. Rear Heights had the least activity, but they were reasonably active. Fig1. PCM5.1/DD_Surround _ Fig 2. Speaker Sizes for 6 Height Speakers test
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Sept 22, 2019 15:03:49 GMT -5
I just thinks it’s like Dolby True HD and DTS Master HD was. Studios will do one of the other, but you would never see both. And they always had a simple DD5.1 sound track. If I did not like the DD TrueHD/ATMOS track in 4k movie, today I would have to go to the 2k movie and apply DTS neural:X to the DTS HDMA 5.1 track ... if DTS is even there in the 2k movie? 4k Ready Player One has both DD TrueHD/ATMOS and DTS HDMA 5.1 to choose from ... but that is rare (but smart) to see both DD ATMOS and DTS HDMA in the same movie. The DTS HDMA 5.1/neural:X version is 5 to 7db lower than its ATMOS equivalent. Not sure why. I was trying to compare sound quality of my bluray player (2 modes) and my network player yesterday. Couldn’t compare because there were such a hugh difference in volume. So I tried to set the volume trim setting so each input played exactly the same volume. I played the same track, first 30 seconds, and measured the highest SPL I got from having RMC on -30db. First from LX800 through balanced in. Then went on with the hdmi pure audio mode. This measured about 3.5db louder. After that I measured N-70AE through analog in, This measured 2db lower than balanced in.. Same record on both CD and from Tidal. 5.5db difference.. Pretty much I think. With this experience I’m not surpriced there’s a volume difference between Atmos and DTS.. But there’s also a hugh difference in the recording itself.. I have movies I easily take up to -15db.. Then some that can’t go beyond -25.. Usually Dolby Atmos having higher and more consistant volume..
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 22, 2019 15:17:00 GMT -5
Based on the Width and Height test, it would be nice for EMO to indicate which speakers were being sent sound. There is no easy way to figure this out with a lot of speakers, having different upmixers or 3D audio formats and having different source material that restricts the number of sound channels. Tools are nice. Why not take the Speaker Size Menu and add an icon, placed in its own column to the left of each speaker name, that would glow when sound was present (on or off icon)? Fig 1. RMC-1 Speaker Size Menu
|
|
|
Post by bblv on Sept 22, 2019 18:52:15 GMT -5
Based on the Width and Height test, it would be nice for EMO to indicate which speakers were being sent sound. There is no easy way to figure this out with a lot of speakers, having different upmixers or 3D audio formats and having different source material that restricts the number of sound channels. Tools are nice. Why not take the Speaker Size Menu and add an icon, placed in its own column to the left of each speaker name, that would glow when sound was present (on or off icon)? View AttachmentFig 1. RMC-1 Speaker Size Menu I think that addition is an absolute must, especially once we’re dealing with 24+ speakers with the expansion modules.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Sept 22, 2019 20:07:15 GMT -5
Another waste of time thread, IMHO, I haven't found any home theatre source material for 16/18/24/36 etc channels. If anyone wants more than 7.1.4 from a disk, or often 5.1.2 streamed, then it's upmixed which means it's no longer Atmos of DTS-X (ie; object oriented). We would simply be using software that GUESSES where sounds should come from. Sometimes it's a good guess, Neural X works the best more often, but sometimes it just sounds fake, which DSU does quite often. Personally I just can't see how Emotiva was ever going to have remotely close to the resources necessary to develop their own upmixer, let alone one that works as well as DTX can and has developed. Dolby finally coming to their senses and allowing 3rd party Atmos upmixing was just the final nail in the Emotiva upmixer's coffin.
Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 22, 2019 20:23:59 GMT -5
Another waste of time thread, IMHO, I haven't found any home theatre source material for 16/18/24/36 etc channels. If anyone wants more than 7.1.4 from a disk, or often 5.1.2 streamed, then it's upmixed which means it's no longer Atmos of DTS-X (ie; object oriented). We would simply be using software that GUESSES where sounds should come from. Sometimes it's a good guess, Neural X works the best more often, but sometimes it just sounds fake, which DSU does quite often. Personally I just can't see how Emotiva was ever going to have remotely close to the resources necessary to develop their own upmixer, let alone one that works as well as DTX can and has developed. Dolby finally coming to their senses and allowing 3rd party Atmos upmixing was just the final nail in the Emotiva upmixer's coffin. Cheers Gary Such a pleasant way to join in haha. Your threads already exist: emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/53745/dolby-atmos-discs-pinned-channelemotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/53746/dolby-atmos-dts-channelsMaybe I misunderstood nospam but I think he was suggesting the 11.1.8 Atmos layouts he experienced at Cedia were native and enjoyable. You should ask him though. He does seem in the know. They just released 9.1.6 for most systems so are you sure you still have had any experience with one that supports more than 7.1.4 without matrixing? On top of that I doubt you are actually debating on running more than 16 so is this just a troll?
|
|
|
Post by Gary Cook on Sept 22, 2019 20:59:20 GMT -5
Another waste of time thread, IMHO, I haven't found any home theatre source material for 16/18/24/36 etc channels. If anyone wants more than 7.1.4 from a disk, or often 5.1.2 streamed, then it's upmixed which means it's no longer Atmos of DTS-X (ie; object oriented). We would simply be using software that GUESSES where sounds should come from. Sometimes it's a good guess, Neural X works the best more often, but sometimes it just sounds fake, which DSU does quite often. Personally I just can't see how Emotiva was ever going to have remotely close to the resources necessary to develop their own upmixer, let alone one that works as well as DTX can and has developed. Dolby finally coming to their senses and allowing 3rd party Atmos upmixing was just the final nail in the Emotiva upmixer's coffin. Such a pleasant way to join in haha. Your threads already exist: emotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/53745/dolby-atmos-discs-pinned-channelemotivalounge.proboards.com/thread/53746/dolby-atmos-dts-channelsMaybe I misunderstood nospam but I think he was suggesting the 11.1.8 Atmos layouts he experienced at Cedia were native and enjoyable. You should ask him though. He does seem in the know. They just released 9.1.6 for most systems so are you sure you still have had any experience with one that supports more than 7.1.4 without matrixing? On top of that I doubt you are actually debating on running more than 16 so is this just a troll? Without getting into a long debate, I currently have a Storm ISP 32 with 16 channels set up. One of my customer's demo theatres is being renovated and I am storing their gear for a few months. It is possible (likely) that since I live in Australia (Zone 2) that we don't get the same source material as the US (Zone 1) but I can only report what I hear with my own ears. From equipment that I have set up, eg; no parallel wiring of the wides (yes, I have experienced that trick). I would also suggest that you are misinterpreting what I posted, my first point was that I doubted Emotiva had the resources to develop an in house up mixer, let alone one of Neural X quality. The second point was that, giving Dolby's awakening, that it is even more dead in the water. Just MHO of course. Cheers Gary
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 22, 2019 21:11:19 GMT -5
Without getting into a long debate, I currently have a Storm ISP 32 with 16 channels set up. One of my customer's demo theatres is being renovated and I am storing their gear for a few months. It is possible (likely) that since I live in Australia (Zone 2) that we don't get the same source material as the US (Zone 1) but I can only report what I hear with my own ears. From equipment that I have set up, eg; no parallel wiring of the wides (yes, I have experienced that trick). I would also suggest that you are misinterpreting what I posted, my first point was that I doubted Emotiva had the resources to develop an in house up mixer, let alone one of Neural X quality. The second point was that, giving Dolby's awakening, that it is even more dead in the water. Just MHO of course. Cheers Gary A earlier post had a link to sdruckers comments on the matter. I’d be surprised if they would give you pinned Atmos and not us on the same movie though. Are your collections Disney owned studios? And my apologies if I took your opening statement in the wrong way. I do think little snippets of info like that and a place to freely talk isn’t useless though. It’s been hard to find a thread where we can focus on what matters for those of us who want to push past 16 without it getting derailed. I do agree about your assessment that upmixers matter but I don’t want to have to lose the object metadata in order to switch from Atmos to Neural:X for added playback. Maybe Dolby will make that unnecessary with their own for bed channels soon. The point I’d make which doesn’t really mean much is Keith explained the science behind arrays which I guess could mean this would be an easier way for them to add speakers rather than a broader upmixer. That I admit is complete conjecture. There certainly seems to be a lot to suggest Atmos metadata can be decoded on larger layouts though with mixed results based on the movie. And of course this is limited by the channel ability of your pre pro to decode which yours currently being 16 I’m surprised your having a different experience than others.
|
|
|
Post by cwt on Sept 23, 2019 5:26:52 GMT -5
I’d be surprised if they would give you pinned Atmos and not us on the same movie though. Are your collections Disney owned studios? Rest assured some of our uhd's don't have the object audio[even pinned] that the U.S. version does ; it pays to check with bluray.com for us I think were losing sight of how atmos [not the fixed rendered 7.1.4 discs] really work ; you must discard the idea of channels thats been ingrained in our psyche As to mixing studios these aren't limited to 7.1.4 speaker positions ..
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 10:43:12 GMT -5
I don’t think you will ever see a movie with both DTS:x and Dolby Atmos sound tracks. Just way too much work for a studio with no real benefit. I think what is desired is an up mixer that can take say Disney pinned 7.1.4 and up mix it to whatever crazy combination of speakers you may have. After all what is the point of a 16-28 channel processor if you can’t make those channels active. I just thinks it’s like Dolby True HD and DTS Master HD was. Studios will do one of the other, but you would never see both. And they always had a simple DD5.1 sound track. Great posts. Agree, looks like RMC-1 is required to have upmixers for all "crazy" numbers of speakers (12 to 24/28) owners want to connect. lol. Since the industry has decided to create monopolies wrt to High Def and 3D sound formats (as you say, because it's too difficult to include more than one), it's the upmixers that will find a competitive stadium to complete in. If RMC-1 is to survive the long haul, they need to incorporate as many upmixers as possible. This will allow RMC-1 owners to decide which upmixer is the best for their "crazy" number of speakers. Maybe all these 3D upmixers will show how poor some of the 3D sound formats really are and force 2K and 4K movies in the future to include more than one HD and 3D sound format. lol. RMC-1 owners want competition and multiple choices with 3D sound formats with 2K and 4K movies. If the industry has decided they want a monopoly, then this may be the demise of these formats ... and the rise of many 3D mixers to fill the void. It would be smart for EMO to include all 3D upmixers to support 12 to 24/28 channels/speakers. Start with these in order of priority: 1. Dolby Digital Surround + Upmixer (more than 7.1.4 channels/speakers) 2. DTS Neural:X Pro Upmixer (more than 11.1 channels/speakers) 3. AuroMax Upmixer (more than 12 channels/speakers) 4. others?
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 23, 2019 10:46:03 GMT -5
Dolby’s DSU is supposed to do more like 17.1.10 but it doesn’t push any of that to the front soundstage. Nothing for the wides. I’d have to look for the pdf document that explains it. I think we just have been getting an older version to this point. www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-home-theater-installation-guidelines.pdfSee the last page for DSU info. They also amended the 11.1.8 layout in this pdf so I believe they are keeping it up to date with what’s intended. So yeah if the DSU comes together and we have 11.1.8 decoding (I understand there are disagreements here) as well then that just leaves Pro and maybe at some point Auro will decide there’s no point in not releasing Auromax to see if companies think it’s worth their proposed charge. If we see 13.1.10 show up in the Atmos pdf is when we can get into those questions of what limits on support we’re looking at with Emotiva I guess. One question I have is will this 17.1.10 DSU apply itself to decoded Atmos supporting playback in 19.1.10 (DSU with inclusion of decoded 11.1.8 wides). If the answer is yes we’re set especially if we get Pro as well. If the DSU is going to be limited to non Atmos it would then make a proprietary Emotiva array upmixer beneficial. This is where the thread gets derailed because now we are at the crossroads so I understand people that want to take the argument to past points (not saying all invalid) but this thread is for 11.1.8 minimum which will be released to us relatively soon so arguing with the past when we are setting our rooms up for what has been promised for the future is the black hole.
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 12:44:23 GMT -5
Another waste of time thread, IMHO, I haven't found any home theatre source material for 16/18/24/36 etc channels. If anyone wants more than 7.1.4 from a disk, or often 5.1.2 streamed, then it's upmixed which means it's no longer Atmos of DTS-X (ie; object oriented). We would simply be using software that GUESSES where sounds should come from. Sometimes it's a good guess, Neural X works the best more often, but sometimes it just sounds fake, which DSU does quite often. Personally I just can't see how Emotiva was ever going to have remotely close to the resources necessary to develop their own upmixer, let alone one that works as well as DTX can and has developed. Dolby finally coming to their senses and allowing 3rd party Atmos upmixing was just the final nail in the Emotiva upmixer's coffin. Cheers Gary Agree with most said ... except the waste of time comment. Not a waste of time ... RMC-1 owners are adding more speakers to probe what the actual speaker limits are. It's a hobby. Not sure what the upmixer speaker limitations are, but we do know what the 3D sound format limitations are (DTS:X 11.1, DDAtmos 7.1.4). RMC-1 owners have only begun to realize the importance of having multiple 3D upmixers. Judging and providing feedback will only make the upmixers better and place pressure on 3D sound formats to improve their product. DTS has always seemed to be more hungry than Dolby to improve their product. Don't want Dolby to have a monopoly ... don't want an RMC-1 Dolby Box ... if Dolby 3D sound formats become a monopoly, the "source" sound quality will become mediocre over time.
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 23, 2019 12:50:33 GMT -5
[/quote]Not sure what the upmixer speaker limitations are, but we do know what the 3D sound format limitations are (DTS:X 11.1, DDAtmos 7.1.4).
[/quote]
Is there an authority that we can actually point to what will back your statement the limits of Atmos is 7.1.4? Let’s focus on providing that evidence and work backwards.. I’d certainly like to know how misled I’ve been this entire time. The last thing I’m trying to do is spread disinformation. Or is that the whole point of this black hole. We hear people from both sides saying the other must be full of it. Is there a way to actually validate one or the other?
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 12:58:13 GMT -5
Dolby’s DSU is supposed to do more like 17.1.10 but it doesn’t push any of that to the front soundstage. Nothing for the wides. I’d have to look for the pdf document that explains it. I think we just have been getting an older version to this point. www.dolby.com/us/en/technologies/dolby-atmos/dolby-atmos-home-theater-installation-guidelines.pdfSee the last page for DSU info. They also amended the 11.1.8 layout in this pdf so I believe they are keeping it up to date with what’s intended. So yeah if the DSU comes together and we have 11.1.8 decoding (I understand there are disagreements here) as well then that just leaves Pro and maybe at some point Auro will decide there’s no point in not releasing Auromax to see if companies think it’s worth their proposed charge. If we see 13.1.10 show up in the Atmos pdf is when we can get into those questions of what limits on support we’re looking at with Emotiva I guess. One question I have is will this 17.1.10 DSU apply itself to decoded Atmos supporting playback in 19.1.10 (DSU with inclusion of decoded 11.1.8 wides). If the answer is yes we’re set especially if we get Pro as well. If the DSU is going to be limited to non Atmos it would then make a proprietary Emotiva array upmixer beneficial. This is where the thread gets derailed because now we are at the crossroads so I understand people that want to take the argument to past points (not saying all invalid) but this thread is for 11.1.8 minimum which will be released to us relatively soon so arguing with the past when we are setting our rooms up for what has been promised for the future is the black hole. Thx for .pdf. Too bad upmixer is only 1 page. They seem to want to overly protect "director/artist intent". Why would adding widths violate "director intent"?
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 23, 2019 13:02:54 GMT -5
I think they interpret the front sound stage as crucial to not involve unwanted artifacts where the rear is meant to be more diffuse and enveloping. Also the fact that bed channels are limited in space more than objects and a lot of that diffuse bed channel info is intended by the mixer to envelop the listener that this expansion is desired. This is just how I interpreted it from what I’ve heard about arrays and dipoles and what used to be desired with the old formats. I agree though I’d want the width channel as an option.
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 13:23:52 GMT -5
Experimentation is the best way. The answer will have caveats: sound format, upmixer, movie source (start time xx.xx.xx ... hrs, min, sec), number of speakers (5.1.6). Unless someone beats me to it, I'll start at 5.1.6 config with PCM5.1/Dolby Surround and keep adding speakers to see what speaker limitations there are with the Dolby Surround upmixer with a specific movie(s). Maybe someone with experience can describe the difference between an upmixer and a sound format to those RMC-1 silent readers that may be confused betwn the two.
|
|
|
Post by lrobertson on Sept 23, 2019 13:26:48 GMT -5
That’s my point though. We’ve supplied avsforum threads that experimented and other users. I’ve also heard RMC-1 users state wides had activity with Atmos. I would think this would be enough to validate 9.1.6 at the very least. People are suggesting wides only get played with matrixing but this goes against what others say both from Emotiva and some higher authorities on avsforum but when these are supplied as evidence they seem to be ignored.
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 13:31:40 GMT -5
That’s my point though. We’ve supplied avsforum threads that experimented and other users. I’ve also heard RMC-1 users state wides had activity with Atmos. I would think this would be enough to validate 9.1.6 at the very least. People are suggesting wides only get played with matrixing but this goes against what others say both from Emotiva and some higher authorities on avsforum but when these are supplied as evidence they seem to be ignored. I'll experiment with 9.1.6 with PCM5.1/DD_Surround on the RMC-1 this week and see if it works. Source material will be 4K Mad Max at 00:27:55 tornado scene ... because that's been veried to work with widths and 6 heights separately. lol.
|
|
|
Post by TDifEQ on Sept 23, 2019 13:34:57 GMT -5
I think they interpret the front sound stage as crucial to not involve unwanted artifacts where the rear is meant to be more diffuse and enveloping. Also the fact that bed channels are limited in space more than objects and a lot of that diffuse bed channel info is intended by the mixer to envelop the listener that this expansion is desired. This is just how I interpreted it from what I’ve heard about arrays and dipoles and what used to be desired with the old formats. I agree though I’d want the width channel as an option. Seems like this .pdf was written more for music, not movies.
|
|