RMC-1

[cwt]

Sept 10, 2012 23:32:55 GMT -5 Dark Ranger said:

As far as I know, there is nothing available beyond discrete 7.1 for home theater. The higher channel numbers are just matrixed content. 11.1 might sound more enveloping, but the actual mixed content probably doesn't exceed 7.1 or 5.1.

I know where your coming from darkranger ; no room for dts neo x wides in my theater ; anyway heres the 1st one ;

www.2l.no/pages/album/090.html

I could manage this settup if ceiling speakers with say adjustable directivity drivers was permissible

www.2l.no/media/2L_Auro-3D-Speaker-Layout-91.pdf

Interesting video here of the mixing or red tails the 1st auro3d movie; dont expect this on the bd though of course ..

www.barco.com/en/news/post/2012/2/1/ever-wonder-how-airplanes-flying-overhead-really-sound

[jevans64]

Sept 5, 2012 14:05:03 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

Regarding the .3 on the AVP: I have been reading comments where the users had issues with callibrating more than one sub using XT32. They ended up summing them to .1
I already have two subs ready, but since these are both supposed to be falnking the center speaker, I am thinking of adding a third double woofer sub at the rear later. But .2 would be enough since I can sum the two front subs together (same distance from MLP) so there would be essentially two twin-subs at each end of the HT.

I don't have the AVP but I have the 5308ci(a) with the upgrade. I think Denon intended the .3 to be used for 2 subs and an LFE channel. They specifically have a setting for transducers ( Bass Shakers ) if you select L/R subs. I'm running the subs in the DefTech BP7000SC and use the third sub-out for transducers in my seating. They have their own 1000w amp.

I didn't have any problems calibrating ( at least for output volume and distance ) the two subs independently with XT32, but you DO have to set up all of your speakers/subs before running Audyssey. I made that mistake with the subs and it only calibrated one of them the first time I ran SubEQ.

[moodyman]

Sept 10, 2012 22:38:18 GMT -5 deewan said:

Sept 10, 2012 7:15:57 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

Although I'd like 11.2 very much and 14.4 even better

I don't want to stray to far away from the original subject, but IMO anything more than 7.2 is wasteful.

1) If we are buying a XMC or RMC, we take this hobby fairly serious. We aren't buying cheap mass produced commercial speakers at Be$t Buy. We are buying well designed, high performing speakers with a solid sound stage (or building them like I do). With 9, 11, or 14 channels, does Dolby think we should spend another $500-$800 on 'height' speakers and even more for channels 10 and 11?

2) My dedicated theater is only 13 ft wide and 19.5 deep. With a room that size, I am running out of real estate fast if I need to squeeze in 2 more speakers on my 7.2 setup to get it to 9.2. Lord knows where I would put all the speakers for 11.2 or more.

3) There are limited soundtracks that native 7.1 Most are still 5.1. I am not that interested in hearing what a device thinks should come through channels. I want to know what the movie makers and sound mixers think should come through channels. So until there are 9.2, or 11.2 mixes, I'll pass. But I will admit the future is coming. 4K monitors are coming out despite VERY limited 4K material.

+1.

I think for 90% of the people in the market for expensive pre pros...11.2 is such a moot point. I think the manufactures know this too..but its probaly pretty cheap to add 11.1/2 capability so why not.

[moparmudder]

Sept 10, 2012 13:49:04 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

Sept 10, 2012 3:50:47 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

Well Atmos is more "3D object" than Neo:X I think - i.e. the future.

I'd love to see Atmos or similar implemented.

The fact that ProLogicIIz (with height) and Atmos™ (also adding height channels) are both from Dolby® is very positive IMO. I am certain this means that we will finally will see proper content for more than 7.1 thanks to the strong and established force that Dolby® is in the surround sound world for both theaters and home surround.

Fingers crossed!

Don't know if I agree with that any more. Back in the day of DVD everything was Dolby with the stray DTS title every now and then. Then came BluRay, not it is the exact opposite, I hardly ever run into a Dolby title, most are DTS-MA, seems Dolby kind gave up on the home market or they would be pushing harder for studios to use their audio format.

[Erwin.BE]

I can relate to most of the criticisms towards more than 7.1. Adding more speakers in a crammed living room is not often desirable if even possible. I do believe one should pick the speaker size in relation to the room size. The airmotiv 4 and 5 aren't that big and have onboard amplification.

But I am building a semi-dedicated HT and it's 5,000 cubic feet large (THX Ultra only goes to 3,000 cu ft) so I can setup for numerous humongeous sized speakers. I might as well go for it since by the time my 5.2 starter set-up will be expanded to 11.2 the content, no doubt, will be there. I hope. The current state of design foresees for 14.3 speaker positions in our HT. Nine towers (with L/R Width) and five ceiling mounts: Center Height, L/R Front Height and L/R Rear Height. Wiring is easy.

[Nemesis.ie]

I'll be wiring for that (and also middle of the room height (directly overhead)) when I do my dedicated room.

[Erwin.BE]

Sept 11, 2012 15:36:55 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

I'll be wiring for that (and also middle of the room height (directly overhead)) when I do my dedicated room.

Yeah, I remember you tried the voice of god before! Auro-3D supports this.

My opinion as a bonafide atheist is that if god wants to speak to me, he can bring his own darn speaker!

[Nemesis.ie]

Nice.

[deewan]

Sept 11, 2012 13:59:58 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

I might as well go for it since by the time my 5.2 starter set-up will be expanded to 11.2 the content, no doubt, will be there.

I wouldn't hold your breath. I can see the soundtracks available in theaters, but really doubt they will make the consumer releases because the number of people that would have the equipment to decode and play the soundtrack will be very limited.

For the best possible sounding room by design, I suggest reading Sound Reproduction by Floyd Toole: www.amazon.com/Sound-Reproduction-Acoustics-Psychoacoustics-Loudspeakers/dp/0240520092

And now, back to the RMC discussion.

[richardrc]

Sept 11, 2012 15:55:58 GMT -5 Erwin.BE said:

nemesis said:

I'll be wiring for that (and also middle of the room height (directly overhead)) when I do my dedicated room.

Yeah, I remember you tried the voice of god before! Auro-3D supports this.

My opinion as a bonafide atheist is that if god wants to speak to me, he can bring his own darn speaker!

ROTFL ;D

[Nemesis.ie]

Sept 10, 2012 23:32:55 GMT -5 Dark Ranger said:

I'm looking forward to where surround formats will bring us over the next 5 years. While something like Dolby Atmos™ is "way cool" for movie theaters and such, it is completely impractical for the majority of home theaters. Heck, I can barely accommodate a 7.1 setup in my 12.5' x 10' listening room. There's no way I can get 9.2 or 11.2 in there.

As far as I know, there is nothing available beyond discrete 7.1 for home theater. The higher channel numbers are just matrixed content. 11.1 might sound more enveloping, but the actual mixed content probably doesn't exceed 7.1 or 5.1.

That's one reason a pre/pro like my UMC-1 and the pending XMC-1 doesn't phase me with "only" 7.1 support, compared to the average AVR touting 14.5 or whatever. I'd rather hear discrete mixes than matrixed soundfields. But that is my
preference.

This is exactly why we need a 3D object based sound format. Then the mixer doesn't need to care how many channels you have in your system and the processor can make use of "any" number of channels you have. Then we can finally tailor the channels to the room/budget and not the source media restrictions.

[hemster]

Sept 12, 2012 10:55:09 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

Sept 10, 2012 23:32:55 GMT -5 Dark Ranger said:

I'm looking forward to where surround formats will bring us over the next 5 years. While something like Dolby Atmos™ is "way cool" for movie theaters and such, it is completely impractical for the majority of home theaters. Heck, I can barely accommodate a 7.1 setup in my 12.5' x 10' listening room. There's no way I can get 9.2 or 11.2 in there.

As far as I know, there is nothing available beyond discrete 7.1 for home theater. The higher channel numbers are just matrixed content. 11.1 might sound more enveloping, but the actual mixed content probably doesn't exceed 7.1 or 5.1.

That's one reason a pre/pro like my UMC-1 and the pending XMC-1 doesn't phase me with "only" 7.1 support, compared to the average AVR touting 14.5 or whatever. I'd rather hear discrete mixes than matrixed soundfields. But that is my
preference.

This is exactly why we need a 3D object based sound format. Then the mixer doesn't need to care how many channels you have in your system and the processor can make use of "any" number of channels you have. Then we can finally tailor the channels to the room/budget and not the source media restrictions.

Agreed, that would be the holy grail of sound processing from the consumer's standpoint. However, unfortunately for us, it is not in the interest of the film studios and component manufacturers since it would preclude them releasing gear with new processing in successive models.

[Nemesis.ie]

Not totally - they can still charge more for units with more channels of output and indeed it might move the developments towards better room corrections systems which will likely have room for improvement over the coming years/decades. Additionally with a user having more speakers and in positions to suit the room, systems ala Trinnov which determine and remap speaker positions will be even more useful and this could be a good product differentiator at the 5.x/7.x price point.

We more or less have this kind of thing (3D objects) in the game world, so it's a bit "odd" that the movie makers are taking so long to "get it" but then a lot of movie industry stuff is based on tradition over science/technology (such as using xenon projector lamps).

[2muchht]

Some interesting side notes:

-- Fox announced that they will support Atmos and will begin to release some of their forthcoming high-profile titles wtih full Atmos mixes and are updated some of their mixing rooms to accomodate this.

-- At the initial announcement of Atmos, and afterwards, Dolby people have been quite specific to say that the height speakers are NOT used for "voice of Gd" type presentation. They are there as part of the way that "objects" are transitioned from one location to another and the height speakers help create that.

-- Similarly, they have said that while this is meant to have more speakers in the theater than in the home, it is a scalable system.


We'll see.

[moparmudder]

Sept 12, 2012 11:21:20 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

We more or less have this kind of thing (3D objects) in the game world, so it's a bit "odd" that the movie makers are taking so long to "get it" but then a lot of movie industry stuff is based on tradition over science/technology (such as using xenon projector lamps).

Or 23.976 fps, I can't believe they are still clinging to that ancient standard in the digital age.

[emovac]

Sept 11, 2012 0:20:51 GMT -5 garbulky said:

As to surround, coming from a 2 channel guy: Most of the market is struggling even with 5.1. The sheer cost, space and aesthetics of going up past 5.1 is prohibitive to the regular joe. Most of the people I know that have 5.1 only have it because they were the cheap htib's at best buy. So yes I agree that more speakers isn't necessarily going to be the future.

Agreed.

I have switchable 5.1 / 7.1. All it takes is a flip of an A/B switch to add the extra two 7.1 speakers. When not in use for 7.1, those two speakers are extra 2-channel bookshelf speakers for music listening. Use the same amp channels and speakers to accomplish both uses.

[rogersch]

Sept 12, 2012 11:21:20 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

systems ala Trinnov which determine and remap speaker positions will be even more useful and this could be a good product differentiator at the 5.x/7.x price point.

Trinnov
That is what I really would like to have the ADA Cinema Reference Mach IV with 16 channel Trinnov EQ. Unfortunately a price tag of $40.000 is a bit to expensive for me.

[Nemesis.ie]

Bingo - I'm hoping 3D object based surround will push that gear into mainstream pricing.

[jamrock]

Sept 12, 2012 12:51:13 GMT -5 moparmudder said:

Sept 12, 2012 11:21:20 GMT -5 Nemesis.ie said:

We more or less have this kind of thing (3D objects) in the game world, so it's a bit "odd" that the movie makers are taking so long to "get it" but then a lot of movie industry stuff is based on tradition over science/technology (such as using xenon projector lamps).

Or 23.976 fps, I can't believe they are still clinging to that ancient standard in the digital age.

Progress has been stymied by the traditionalists who claim that "pictures" filmed at more than 24 fps appear "too videolike" 60fps. They like the grainy texture of 24fps. So, we remain stuck in the past because these folks, despite a decided minority, are very vocal & influential. Their negative reviews are very impactful on the sale of video displays. Yes, all displays have native 60fps but in the A/V press, 24fps is treated as the premium display option

[zaphod2012]

anyone know if the XMC and RMC will have headphone socket, or the UMC-200/500?