|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 4, 2020 18:53:37 GMT -5
I've been searching for a DTS:X Official speaker layout guide, but it is not to be found I guess. Anyone know where to find such a Unicorn?
I know from what I've read that DTS:X will "adapt" to what is installed in whatever setup it comes across, but what does that really mean? Does it know all the differing terminologies being used by various manufacturers? I've seen Front and Rear Presence in some early diagrams from one manufacturer a couple years ago, so is this still a current term?
To be more specific, what are the speaker location names that DTS:X is looking for when it decides to place sounds somewhere? Heights? Tops? I don't think Wides are used, but not sure.?.
I've seen photos of a test rig showing 28 channels by Trinnov which has most of the overhead speakers in a circular arrangement, but also has on the Front Wall two speakers which I would call Heights, but no Rear Heights.
I'd love to see something official from DTS, even if it's only what THEY call all the speaker locations, but it seems that it's kinda like the Wild West, shoot from the hip, hope for the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by knucklehead on Jun 4, 2020 19:01:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 5, 2020 0:46:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 1:24:07 GMT -5
This is perfect! Thanks! They still don't explain their nomenclature for the speaker location tags, but maybe it's in the processor manual. Probably doesn't matter, just would like to know. Like the bank robber in Dirty Harry: |
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 1:35:55 GMT -5
Yeah, I've got the guide, and my layout is based on the Dolby setup. I just wanted to know how DTS wants their setup to be implemented, but apparently DTS is relying on third parties to show how it's done as the Trinnov info posted above shows. So it turns out that DTS is a multi-layered polar pattern vs the Dolby grid, with both using a mix of angles vs distance with limits. The Trinnov info is rather complex the first couple times through, but once you delete what you don't have it starts making sense. |
|
|
|
Post by markc on Jun 5, 2020 3:26:55 GMT -5
The Official DTS line is that there are no recommended speaker positions for DTS:X (And also for Neural:X) (Curiously the ancient guides for legacy DTS 5.1, 6.1ES and 7.1 have also vanished without any trace at all from the DTS site!) The DTS:X / Neural:X algorithms adapt to the user's speaker positions, but herein lies the problem. I think they are trying to be too clever and seem more user friendly than Dolby with it's prescriptive speaker positioning and naming. It sounds good on paper - "Put your speakers where you can or leave them where they are and DTS will adapt to them" How will the DTS upmixer adapt to them? It has to rely on the way the equipment manufacturer (Emotiva in this case) describes and allows users to input the ACTUAL speaker positions, and then how it tags them and flags them to the DTS mixer, which is a second layer of potential problems arising as it relies on the way this information is sent to the DTS decoders / upmixers. From other user's post a few pages back int the RMC/XMC thread, there is a problem with DTS rendering depending on what you have ceiling/height/Atmos enabled speakers configured as in the Emotiva Speaker configuration. emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1034165/threade.g. What is a Front Height speaker reported as, to the DTS mixers? (Neural:X and DTS:X). Dolby treats Height and Top and Atmos Enabled speakers differently regarding panning of sound and equalisation. An "Overhead" helicopter sound placement coming from sidewall mounted Height speakers is going to be very different from ceiling mounted in the way sound needs to be mapped to them. e.g.2 What is a Front Wide speaker reported as to the DTS mixers? (In theory FW is not used in DTS configurations, but enabling Front Wides (As either bi-amp or a speaker) cause Neural:X to be enabled by default) e.g. 3 DTS:X (And therefore possibly Neural:X) is only 7.1.4 compared with Dolby 9.1.4 or 7.1.6 In the latter case, how are Middle Top (or height, or Atmos) reported to DTS mixers? Are they just ignored? |
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 8:46:12 GMT -5
markc , this is why I started this thread. I've been wanting to find out what the DTS setup is SUPPOSED to be and what the Locations are SUPPOSED to be Named. I agree with you that there's something amiss with the naming, and hence, Neural:X implementation. We need guidelines for Where the speaker locations should be, just like what is supplied to Trinnov owners. For the most part, DTS:X mirrors Dolby 7.1.4 so I'm ok with this much, but, is the RMC/XMC nomenclature correct once you get beyond Tops? The speakers we know as Front Heights and are mounted on the front wall are named differently in old DTS info where they are called Front Presence speakers. So is this why some movies have issues while others don't? Put another way - Which way is up?
|
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jun 5, 2020 9:05:19 GMT -5
ttocs, I think markc nailed it in his reply above. HERE ia a link to a 142 page discussion over on the AVS forum that will tell you practically everything you might want to know about DTS:X. I have not come close to reading the entire thread, but there is some very useful and enlightening information in the thread. Since the thread was started four years ago, you may want to start by reading the last 10 pages first. But to answer your direct question, an earlier reply was correct. DTS:X does not have a recommended speaker layout. Using up to 11.1 pre-rendered matrixed channels (it does not use "objects"), it can readily adapt to an Atmos 7.1.4 layout. I do also believe that markc is correct in that "panning" can directly be affected by how the processor is describing the speaker layout to the DTS:X renderer. I did take the opportunity, while my 8805 is still in my system, to redefine my ceiling mounted (top) speakers as "heights". It does indeed change the perceived overhead panning effects to a limited degree, but I did not lose volume (as is being reported on the XMC/RMC). The output level remained consistent whether using DTS Neutral X or DSU. One opportunity that did present itself was the ability to try "Auro 3D" for the first time (as it requires the speaker nomenclature of "heights", not "tops"). Until now, I've never given it much attention. But aside from the non-existent "native" content here in the States, it really is an outstanding upmixer. Having now heard this for myself, I do wish that Emotiva would have given it the same consideration that Monoprice did in their HTP-1. It think it may have been worth a few extra bucks. Hope this helps... 
|
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 5, 2020 9:07:36 GMT -5
It's always nicer when you can just promise to do "everything, everywhere, for everyone - automatically".....  (I was really hoping for an Imoji of Muttley doing his trademark snicker - but I couldn't find one...)
Maybe it's time to actually sit back and enjoy a movie... You know they're just going to change it eventually anyway...
The Official DTS line is that there are no recommended speaker positions for DTS:X (And also for Neural:X) (Curiously the ancient guides for legacy DTS 5.1, 6.1ES and 7.1 have also vanished without any trace at all from the DTS site!) The DTS:X / Neural:X algorithms adapt to the user's speaker positions, but herein lies the problem. I think they are trying to be too clever and seem more user friendly than Dolby with it's prescriptive speaker positioning and naming. It sounds good on paper - "Put your speakers where you can or leave them where they are and DTS will adapt to them" How will the DTS upmixer adapt to them? It has to rely on the way the equipment manufacturer (Emotiva in this case) describes and allows users to input the ACTUAL speaker positions, and then how it tags them and flags them to the DTS mixer, which is a second layer of potential problems arising as it relies on the way this information is sent to the DTS decoders / upmixers. From other user's post a few pages back int the RMC/XMC thread, there is a problem with DTS rendering depending on what you have ceiling/height/Atmos enabled speakers configured as in the Emotiva Speaker configuration. emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1034165/threade.g. What is a Front Height speaker reported as, to the DTS mixers? (Neural:X and DTS:X). Dolby treats Height and Top and Atmos Enabled speakers differently regarding panning of sound and equalisation. An "Overhead" helicopter sound placement coming from sidewall mounted Height speakers is going to be very different from ceiling mounted in the way sound needs to be mapped to them. e.g.2 What is a Front Wide speaker reported as to the DTS mixers? (In theory FW is not used in DTS configurations, but enabling Front Wides (As either bi-amp or a speaker) cause Neural:X to be enabled by default) e.g. 3 DTS:X (And therefore possibly Neural:X) is only 7.1.4 compared with Dolby 9.1.4 or 7.1.6 In the latter case, how are Middle Top (or height, or Atmos) reported to DTS mixers? Are they just ignored? |
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 9:16:59 GMT -5
Just for you @keithl.
|
|
novisnick
EmoPhile
CEO Secret Monoblock Society
Posts: 27,223 
|
Post by novisnick on Jun 5, 2020 9:20:44 GMT -5
It's always nicer when you can just promise to do "everything, everywhere, for everyone - automatically"..... (I was really hoping for an Imoji of Muttley doing his trademark snicker - but I couldn't find one...)
Maybe it's time to actually sit back and enjoy a movie... You know they're just going to change it eventually anyway...
The Official DTS line is that there are no recommended speaker positions for DTS:X (And also for Neural:X) (Curiously the ancient guides for legacy DTS 5.1, 6.1ES and 7.1 have also vanished without any trace at all from the DTS site!) The DTS:X / Neural:X algorithms adapt to the user's speaker positions, but herein lies the problem. I think they are trying to be too clever and seem more user friendly than Dolby with it's prescriptive speaker positioning and naming. It sounds good on paper - "Put your speakers where you can or leave them where they are and DTS will adapt to them" How will the DTS upmixer adapt to them? It has to rely on the way the equipment manufacturer (Emotiva in this case) describes and allows users to input the ACTUAL speaker positions, and then how it tags them and flags them to the DTS mixer, which is a second layer of potential problems arising as it relies on the way this information is sent to the DTS decoders / upmixers. From other user's post a few pages back int the RMC/XMC thread, there is a problem with DTS rendering depending on what you have ceiling/height/Atmos enabled speakers configured as in the Emotiva Speaker configuration. emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1034165/threade.g. What is a Front Height speaker reported as, to the DTS mixers? (Neural:X and DTS:X). Dolby treats Height and Top and Atmos Enabled speakers differently regarding panning of sound and equalisation. An "Overhead" helicopter sound placement coming from sidewall mounted Height speakers is going to be very different from ceiling mounted in the way sound needs to be mapped to them. e.g.2 What is a Front Wide speaker reported as to the DTS mixers? (In theory FW is not used in DTS configurations, but enabling Front Wides (As either bi-amp or a speaker) cause Neural:X to be enabled by default) e.g. 3 DTS:X (And therefore possibly Neural:X) is only 7.1.4 compared with Dolby 9.1.4 or 7.1.6 In the latter case, how are Middle Top (or height, or Atmos) reported to DTS mixers? Are they just ignored? Fixed it  |
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 9:27:43 GMT -5
For the record, when I host Movie Night! we always watch the movie in the audio mode it was released with. Mono, Stereo, 2.1, etc. We don't want any upmix at all.
This Phil'sOsophy (philosophy) also goes to the theatrical release soundtrack - meaning - we watched Das Boot in German with subtitles, exactly how I saw it in the theater. The only exception to this is the original Mad Max, which was released in the United States with the American Dubbed version, but it's much more enjoyable in its native audio track. Somewhere I've got the VHS tape of Mad Max with the dubbed soundtrack.
|
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 5, 2020 9:47:47 GMT -5
Much obliged. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 9,941
|
Post by KeithL on Jun 5, 2020 9:55:02 GMT -5
As far as I know we follow the latest official Dolby nomenclature - correctly. markc , this is why I started this thread. I've been wanting to find out what the DTS setup is SUPPOSED to be and what the Locations are SUPPOSED to be Named. I agree with you that there's something amiss with the naming, and hence, Neural:X implementation. We need guidelines for Where the speaker locations should be, just like what is supplied to Trinnov owners. For the most part, DTS:X mirrors Dolby 7.1.4 so I'm ok with this much, but, is the RMC/XMC nomenclature correct once you get beyond Tops? The speakers we know as Front Heights and are mounted on the front wall are named differently in old DTS info where they are called Front Presence speakers. So is this why some movies have issues while others don't? Put another way - Which way is up?
|
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 5, 2020 10:13:32 GMT -5
As far as I know we follow the latest official Dolby nomenclature - correctly. I don't doubt that. But, is DTS:X supposed to "follow" Dolby nomenclature? Also, do you have a theory as to why we are noticing a 6dB drop in volume with Neural:X? |
|
|
|
Post by markc on Jun 5, 2020 10:18:02 GMT -5
markc , this is why I started this thread. I've been wanting to find out what the DTS setup is SUPPOSED to be and what the Locations are SUPPOSED to be Named. I agree with you that there's something amiss with the naming, and hence, Neural:X implementation. We need guidelines for Where the speaker locations should be, just like what is supplied to Trinnov owners. For the most part, DTS:X mirrors Dolby 7.1.4 so I'm ok with this much, but, is the RMC/XMC nomenclature correct once you get beyond Tops? The speakers we know as Front Heights and are mounted on the front wall are named differently in old DTS info where they are called Front Presence speakers. So is this why some movies have issues while others don't? Put another way - Which way is up? The Linked Trinnov document is really not that useful unless you are setting up a mini cinema. Three tiers of height speakers? Really? The one part of possible relevance is a single table on page 20 where they attempt to translate the DTS 7.1.4 and Auro3D equivalents of the Dolby surround speakers. The solution as Keith said is to configure your speakers as per the Dolby Standards. At least something will be correct, and hopefully DTS:X sources can be mixed properly into that configuration. DTS:X encodes aside, for all other DTS sources (DTS core, DTS-HD and DTS-HD MA) I 100% recommend using PCM and then engage the Dolby Surround Upmixer. This gets rid of all of the confusion and potential for error with DTS setups. You might not like how Dolby are doing it (Elevating the sound field rather than providing discrete channel interpolation like Neural:X does) , but at least you know for sure you are getting close to what Dolby intended when they wrote the upmixing algorithms and what the sound mixer intended (or ended up with) when they coded the surround to Dolby format. The same absolutely can't be said about DTS upmixing! You are almost certainly not getting what the mixing engineer or DTS intended, because we don't know in which country the football stadium is, let alone have a chance of getting any sort of level playing field. Plus, DTS haven't even defined what the playing field ought to or could look like. Then, we have to rely on the Surround Sound Processor to map/name/identify speakers correctly and translate this correctly to the7.1.4 of the DTS upmixer. Add to this the Volume drop with Neural X and I conclude that bitstreaming DTS to these Emotiva's is a turkey. Thankfully, Atmos is leagues ahead in the popularity stakes when it comes to numbers of titles on shiny discs. |
|
|
|
Post by oleops on Jun 6, 2021 5:09:02 GMT -5
Just reading some old threads here.. after I jumped the emotiva train..
Back in the days I loved DTS with all my heart (From a technical standpoint tough...)
Buying imported LD with DTS if I came over them. When I finally got the DTS signal out from the LD player into my brand new $1000 Rotel DTS standalone decoder, I couldt use it :-p as it was hardcoded with a center channel and I didnt have one of any quality at the time :-( Think I almost never used the decoder.. When HD-DVD and Bluray war started I luckly got uppon the right horse buing the SONY $1000 again... flagship BDP-S1 only to put it on the shelf a couple of months later as it never could decode the DTS Master Audio :-p
Still loving the DTS idea I must with sad heart say that my new cinema will be setup as ATMOS by the letter, in the start I was planning with heights on the walls not cealing as I tought that was more DTS idea.. now they are nailed as cealing.
Still I hope for DTS pro on my Emotiva but I never consider the RMC1 to get more channels, geared down lately, going for 9.1(3).4
Agree it is strange they dont put out placement of the speakers tough.
Now I am only looking for ATMOS on my Blu's and UHD discs :-(
|
|
|
|
Post by hahnsoulo on Jul 10, 2021 1:59:07 GMT -5
Just reading some old threads here.. after I jumped the emotiva train.. Back in the days I loved DTS with all my heart (From a technical standpoint tough...) Buying imported LD with DTS if I came over them. When I finally got the DTS signal out from the LD player into my brand new $1000 Rotel DTS standalone decoder, I couldt use it :-p as it was hardcoded with a center channel and I didnt have one of any quality at the time :-( Think I almost never used the decoder.. When HD-DVD and Bluray war started I luckly got uppon the right horse buing the SONY $1000 again... flagship BDP-S1 only to put it on the shelf a couple of months later as it never could decode the DTS Master Audio :-p Still loving the DTS idea I must with sad heart say that my new cinema will be setup as ATMOS by the letter, in the start I was planning with heights on the walls not cealing as I tought that was more DTS idea.. now they are nailed as cealing. Still I hope for DTS pro on my Emotiva but I never consider the RMC1 to get more channels, geared down lately, going for 9.1(3).4 Agree it is strange they dont put out placement of the speakers tough. Now I am only looking for ATMOS on my Blu's and UHD discs :-( Actually, according to the latest Dolby Atmos speaker configs for 7.1.6 (and 9.1.6), you can do the typical 6 speakers in the ceiling, but you can also do this: www.dolby.com/about/support/guide/speaker-setup-guides/7.1.6-mounted-overhead-speakers-setup-guide/It's basically 2 front height speakers on the front wall, 2 back height speakers on the back wall, and 2 in-ceiling speakers directly in line with the seating position. That's an officially recommended solution from Dolby. Presumably, with DTS:X being 7.1.4 it would ignore the 2 in-ceiling speakers (or upmix them somehow), and it would use the front and rear heights as height channels, so that solution kind of gives you something that's both Dolby and DTS friendly. |
|
Germotiva
Minor Hero
Alter Mann über 50 aus Deutschland
Posts: 90
|
Post by Germotiva on Jul 10, 2021 4:16:22 GMT -5
Hello, I would be enough if at all an upmixer from each signal conjures up a 9.1.6.
So that the 16 channels are used.
I position and set the Ls so that I like it on my room and seat.
|
|
