|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 14:44:28 GMT -5
While you are playing with these things, try out the RTA. I haven't taken the time to get everything out to test this, but in my mind, I'm thinking this could show something on a per channel basis. Maybe focus on the front 3. Secondly, I'm not entirely sure if we should rely on sweeps or not. I'm torn on this one. It seems like the higher the bit rate, the more we hear the issue. Is a frequency sweep going to show that with an RTA since it measures peaks? I could see how RTA could be revealing playing a specific scene for 10 seconds, but that could be difficult to reproduce in a somewhat scientific way. I will leave it to others to do more complicated measurements. But, I really believe it's counterproductive to use more than one channel due to phase issues etc. Just do one channel, it's easier to see any difference between the two codecs. Yeah, sorry I wasn't more clear. I meant LCR individually compared to Surround mode measurements individually during the same, short scene.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 15:16:41 GMT -5
Havn't read through this whole thread. Didn’t even know it existed but definitely experiencing what others are. Hard to put into words. Just doesn’t sound right. Stuff I used to use as demo material on my old receiver now sounds quite bad. I stay away from it. Emotiva wasn’t much help on the phone, but I think it was a read between the lines type of thing. If it was a legit issue they were working on I assume he would have said that, and I get that they can just say “it is the way it is.” So my current thinking is I have to live with it, or return it, which isn’t totally unfair. Wasn’t the best interaction but much better than saying it would be fixed if it actually won’t be. Yes, I know, it is a problem, and many like you may not have noticed before. (Even though with the 6db volume drop it is glaringly obvious!) yet still it is being suggested in this forum that us, as the end users, become Emotiva's fact finding squad and do the testing to find where the fault is. It is even hinted at as to whether an equipment fault even exists just because some people don't suffer it or notice it or have the configuration that brings it out. This is quite insulting!. It would be great if Keith or Lonnie could even acknowledge that they see some of us are having a problem and confirm that a) They are trying to replicate it or b) They are/will be working on a fix. At least then, we would stop running down these processors which are otherwise mostly sorted (Dirac still to debut). It doesn't look good to potential buyers to read of these problems. Thankfully my comments are here rather on AVSforums etc, where I am less likely to get help. The last request for such testing even suggested we note which movie, which source, which part of the movie. This means the movie of this forum is Groundhog Day! Please - no need to report what you are listening or from where or when Neural:X on the Emotiva messes up the sound. I don't know how many times I need to repeat (especially as repeating gripes about the product (on our gracious manufacturers own forum) gets one banned!) but the source and origin and file format are not relevant. - It is the implementation of Neural:X on the XMC-2 for sure (as an XMC-2 is what I have, but therefore probably all of the current Emotiva Flagship Surround Sound Processors are blighted) It does not matter - PCM, DTS (all variants - except DTS:X (which I can't test as I have 7.1) 96/24 which the processor doesn't play) , and, as I recently found (which beyond all shadow of doubt places this squarely at Emotiva's feet to sort) - Balance analogue stereo audio in, when upmixed is terrible. Today I listened to Eagles - Farewell I Tour Blu-ray (My Oppo is set to bitstream as PCM to prevent the XMC-2 getting its dirty Neural:x on any DTS whatsoever) and flipped from Stereo (with Dolby Surround applied) to multichannel direct and there was no big difference at all! PCM multichannel=Dolby upmixed stereo Then, Changing the Oppo to Bitstream the 5.1 DTS-HD MA and flipping between Stereo (With Dolby Surround to upmix to 7.1) and DTS-HD MA (With Neural:X) and the upmixed stereo via Dolby Surround is a CLEAR winner. Muggy DTS/Neural with a massive volume drop What more proof that the issue is real and that is is purely Emotiva's Hardware/Firmware problem! It has been replicated by another user via USB as well.
|
|
|
Post by bluescale on Jun 22, 2020 15:35:58 GMT -5
I'm still fumbling around with REW but I managed to get this graph of only my Right speaker. It's the best I can do right now. Frankly, I don't think it shows anything except a difference in output between Neural:X and DD Surround - 6dB diff. I didn't show all the way to 20K, the graph is already difficult to read. Neural:X is Red, DD Surround is Green View AttachmentThat’s quite helpful, thank you. I wanted to see if anything weird was happening at the crossover, but based on the FR, I don’t see anything other than the spl issue. I honestly have no idea if this is a valid test or not. I’m just trying to generate some ideas/thoughts.
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,756
Member is Online
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 22, 2020 15:40:26 GMT -5
It bears repeating again at this point that the only complaint that I know is measurable is the reduction in volume. I reported this to Emotiva, and like has been said, it's probably not near the top of the punch list. The muddyness or lack of dynamics is something I firmly believe is a movie to movie thing, but with the right evidence I can instantly be enlightened. So I'm asking if there is a particular scene in a movie that sounds great in Dolby and sucks in Neural:X on an RMC/XMC-2, AND, sounds great on a different brand processor in both formats with no difference whatsoever? If there's a difference at all then it all falls apart. Please let me be clear about this. We need some kind of test that anyone with the same setup and equipment can dulicate. It seems like the loss of volume is a clear issue, and Emotiva should be able to readily replicate it. Without knowing the "why" behind it, it's hard to say whether that's easy or hard to fix. Of course, if someone has flux-capacitor powered amps it might not be an issue...just crank it up! (And, maybe if some folks who are commenting on that could work with Emotiva on a test of that...maybe by coordinating to send saves of their setup to Emotiva for dB comparisons vs. their setups...perhaps that could at least get a fix on that going - OR...advice back to users on what to change in their setups...) That said, to me - when dB level is low - I perceive sound as lacking dynamics, so it's possible the two thing are linked. Re. "muddy sound", depending on what people mean...maybe that's related also. Maybe a poll among those who responded to sort out the 3 separate issues (vs. trying to compare speaker enablement) might help ID which is the bigger issue. From reading comments here and in other threads - it seems like the ~6 dB drop is the really big issue. I wonder if that were fixed if people would comment on the others. But, I would reco the USB stick test of a few key folks with Emotiva first. Mark
|
|
|
Post by bluescale on Jun 22, 2020 15:47:10 GMT -5
Okay, this is a good representation of the dB issue. Now, someone not having this issue should try the same thing and see what they come up with. What about some full frequency sweeps (left channel + sub, right channel + sub, and center +sub) both in surround mode and with Neural X enabled? That might show us if there's an issue with the frequency response. Already did on the RMC-1 owners thread - just after 1.10 was introduced and this all kicked off. Prior to 1.10 I noticed the drop in volume level, however after 1.10 I don't have any of the symptoms reported by the users here, in any and all combinations tested - sure I reported that further back this thread.
I was hoping to have someone replicate the test in REW to see if different processors are behaving differently. I’m hoping to standardize the test, rather than everyone doing things differently. What we’d really want to compare is a single speaker (plus sub) with a standard 7.1 configuration, with a 7.4 with tops configured, and 7.4 with wires configured. Neural:X vs. DSU vs. Surround for each of those. Even if the only thing that quantifies is the SPL drop, it’s worthwhile in my opinion. And I’d much prefer REW test signal to a cellphone app measuring a movie clip. Again, it’s all about precise repeatability. But I also know that REW measurements create a barrier to entry due to some additional complexity. I just wish I’d thought to do some of this before sending my XMC-2 back to Emotiva. Then I could have asked them to check my processor out with specific details on how to reproduce.
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 22, 2020 16:05:16 GMT -5
Already did on the RMC-1 owners thread - just after 1.10 was introduced and this all kicked off. Prior to 1.10 I noticed the drop in volume level, however after 1.10 I don't have any of the symptoms reported by the users here, in any and all combinations tested - sure I reported that further back this thread.
I was hoping to have someone replicate the test in REW to see if different processors are behaving differently. I’m hoping to standardize the test, rather than everyone doing things differently. What we’d really want to compare is a single speaker (plus sub) with a standard 7.1 configuration, with a 7.4 with tops configured, and 7.4 with wires configured. Neural:X vs. DSU vs. Surround for each of those. Even if the only thing that quantifies is the SPL drop, it’s worthwhile in my opinion. And I’d much prefer REW test signal to a cellphone app measuring a movie clip. Again, it’s all about precise repeatability. But I also know that REW measurements create a barrier to entry due to some additional complexity. I just wish I’d thought to do some of this before sending my XMC-2 back to Emotiva. Then I could have asked them to check my processor out with specific details on how to reproduce. Firstly, I'm a nube at REW, but I catch on quick. If someone can point me in the right direction I might be able to help a little. Secondly, my speakers get sealed in plastic tomorrow because first thing Wednesday one bathroom is getting demolished, so I'll be in dust-protection mode. This is all to say that I've only got tonight to do much of anything.
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 22, 2020 16:06:56 GMT -5
It bears repeating again at this point that the only complaint that I know is measurable is the reduction in volume. I reported this to Emotiva, and like has been said, it's probably not near the top of the punch list. The muddyness or lack of dynamics is something I firmly believe is a movie to movie thing, but with the right evidence I can instantly be enlightened. So I'm asking if there is a particular scene in a movie that sounds great in Dolby and sucks in Neural:X on an RMC/XMC-2, AND, sounds great on a different brand processor in both formats with no difference whatsoever? If there's a difference at all then it all falls apart. Please let me be clear about this. We need some kind of test that anyone with the same setup and equipment can dulicate. It seems like the loss of volume is a clear issue, and Emotiva should be able to readily replicate it. Without knowing the "why" behind it, it's hard to say whether that's easy or hard to fix. Of course, if someone has flux-capacitor powered amps it might not be an issue...just crank it up! (And, maybe if some folks who are commenting on that could work with Emotiva on a test of that...maybe by coordinating to send saves of their setup to Emotiva for dB comparisons vs. their setups...perhaps that could at least get a fix on that going - OR...advice back to users on what to change in their setups...) That said, to me - when dB level is low - I perceive sound as lacking dynamics, so it's possible the two thing are linked. Re. "muddy sound", depending on what people mean...maybe that's related also. Maybe a poll among those who responded to sort out the 3 separate issues (vs. trying to compare speaker enablement) might help ID which is the bigger issue. From reading comments here and in other threads - it seems like the ~6 dB drop is the really big issue. I wonder if that were fixed if people would comment on the others. But, I would reco the USB stick test of a few key folks with Emotiva first. Mark What would you suggest be in the poll? Unfortunately polls can't be edited, or added to once they are attached to a thread, so it would be a new thread.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 16:11:42 GMT -5
It bears repeating again at this point that the only complaint that I know is measurable is the reduction in volume. I reported this to Emotiva, and like has been said, it's probably not near the top of the punch list. The muddyness or lack of dynamics is something I firmly believe is a movie to movie thing, but with the right evidence I can instantly be enlightened. So I'm asking if there is a particular scene in a movie that sounds great in Dolby and sucks in Neural:X on an RMC/XMC-2, AND, sounds great on a different brand processor in both formats with no difference whatsoever? If there's a difference at all then it all falls apart. Please let me be clear about this. We need some kind of test that anyone with the same setup and equipment can dulicate. It seems like the loss of volume is a clear issue, and Emotiva should be able to readily replicate it. Without knowing the "why" behind it, it's hard to say whether that's easy or hard to fix. Of course, if someone has flux-capacitor powered amps it might not be an issue...just crank it up! (And, maybe if some folks who are commenting on that could work with Emotiva on a test of that...maybe by coordinating to send saves of their setup to Emotiva for dB comparisons vs. their setups...perhaps that could at least get a fix on that going - OR...advice back to users on what to change in their setups...) That said, to me - when dB level is low - I perceive sound as lacking dynamics, so it's possible the two thing are linked. Re. "muddy sound", depending on what people mean...maybe that's related also. Maybe a poll among those who responded to sort out the 3 separate issues (vs. trying to compare speaker enablement) might help ID which is the bigger issue. From reading comments here and in other threads - it seems like the ~6 dB drop is the really big issue. I wonder if that were fixed if people would comment on the others. But, I would reco the USB stick test of a few key folks with Emotiva first. Mark the volume loss isn't even a major concern to me. One can simply turn up the volume. There is loss of audio/bit rate or it is going somewhere it shouldn't. It has been reported and discussed across numerous sources and at least three different types of input. HDMI, USB and analog in.
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,756
Member is Online
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 22, 2020 16:31:23 GMT -5
It seems like the loss of volume is a clear issue, and Emotiva should be able to readily replicate it. Without knowing the "why" behind it, it's hard to say whether that's easy or hard to fix. Of course, if someone has flux-capacitor powered amps it might not be an issue...just crank it up! (And, maybe if some folks who are commenting on that could work with Emotiva on a test of that...maybe by coordinating to send saves of their setup to Emotiva for dB comparisons vs. their setups...perhaps that could at least get a fix on that going - OR...advice back to users on what to change in their setups...) That said, to me - when dB level is low - I perceive sound as lacking dynamics, so it's possible the two thing are linked. Re. "muddy sound", depending on what people mean...maybe that's related also. Maybe a poll among those who responded to sort out the 3 separate issues (vs. trying to compare speaker enablement) might help ID which is the bigger issue. From reading comments here and in other threads - it seems like the ~6 dB drop is the really big issue. I wonder if that were fixed if people would comment on the others. But, I would reco the USB stick test of a few key folks with Emotiva first. Mark the volume loss isn't even a major concern to me. One can simply turn up the volume. There is loss of audio/bit rate or it is going somewhere it shouldn't. It has been reported and discussed across numerous sources and at least three different types of input. HDMI, USB and analog in. I must have missed the loss of bit rate...how does one know that's happening? Mark
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,756
Member is Online
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 22, 2020 16:34:00 GMT -5
It seems like the loss of volume is a clear issue, and Emotiva should be able to readily replicate it. Without knowing the "why" behind it, it's hard to say whether that's easy or hard to fix. Of course, if someone has flux-capacitor powered amps it might not be an issue...just crank it up! (And, maybe if some folks who are commenting on that could work with Emotiva on a test of that...maybe by coordinating to send saves of their setup to Emotiva for dB comparisons vs. their setups...perhaps that could at least get a fix on that going - OR...advice back to users on what to change in their setups...) That said, to me - when dB level is low - I perceive sound as lacking dynamics, so it's possible the two thing are linked. Re. "muddy sound", depending on what people mean...maybe that's related also. Maybe a poll among those who responded to sort out the 3 separate issues (vs. trying to compare speaker enablement) might help ID which is the bigger issue. From reading comments here and in other threads - it seems like the ~6 dB drop is the really big issue. I wonder if that were fixed if people would comment on the others. But, I would reco the USB stick test of a few key folks with Emotiva first. Mark What would you suggest be in the poll? Unfortunately polls can't be edited, or added to once they are attached to a thread, so it would be a new thread. I'll look at the polling options available here and make a reco by tomorrow at latest. Mark
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 22, 2020 16:42:46 GMT -5
megash0n the reduced volume actually is a concern for those, like me, who have lower gain amps. And frankly, it should concern everyone if only because of reduced signal to noise possibilities. Look at it this way, we are already leveling to the lowest common denominator - the lowest gain amps and/or the farthest away speakers - so why compound the issue? I've got a 8dB spread between all my speaker levels.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 18:27:58 GMT -5
the volume loss isn't even a major concern to me. One can simply turn up the volume. There is loss of audio/bit rate or it is going somewhere it shouldn't. It has been reported and discussed across numerous sources and at least three different types of input. HDMI, USB and analog in. I must have missed the loss of bit rate...how does one know that's happening? Mark As I've described it in the past, loss of bit rate is one of the ways I think it sounds. Others say dynamics. They could both be true or neither. One one hand, it sounds like significant bit rate loss, but it also seems to manifest into something that sounds like DRC.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 18:30:23 GMT -5
megash0n the reduced volume actually is a concern for those, like me, who have lower gain amps. And frankly, it should concern everyone if only because of reduced signal to noise possibilities. Look at it this way, we are already leveling to the lowest common denominator - the lowest gain amps and/or the farthest away speakers - so why compound the issue? I've got a 8dB spread between all my speaker levels. Sorry, I wasn't trying to minimize the issue necessarily. I guess what I'm trying to say is that a gain issue isn't as concerning as outright missing audio. They both are problems. For me, I rank them of importance in my own head. Secondly, I don't think this is a single issue. I think it is multiple issues.
|
|
|
Post by bluescale on Jun 22, 2020 18:52:37 GMT -5
I was hoping to have someone replicate the test in REW to see if different processors are behaving differently. I’m hoping to standardize the test, rather than everyone doing things differently. What we’d really want to compare is a single speaker (plus sub) with a standard 7.1 configuration, with a 7.4 with tops configured, and 7.4 with wires configured. Neural:X vs. DSU vs. Surround for each of those. Even if the only thing that quantifies is the SPL drop, it’s worthwhile in my opinion. And I’d much prefer REW test signal to a cellphone app measuring a movie clip. Again, it’s all about precise repeatability. But I also know that REW measurements create a barrier to entry due to some additional complexity. I just wish I’d thought to do some of this before sending my XMC-2 back to Emotiva. Then I could have asked them to check my processor out with specific details on how to reproduce. Firstly, I'm a nube at REW, but I catch on quick. If someone can point me in the right direction I might be able to help a little. Secondly, my speakers get sealed in plastic tomorrow because first thing Wednesday one bathroom is getting demolished, so I'll be in dust-protection mode. This is all to say that I've only got tonight to do much of anything. For simplicity sake, since you only have tonight, pick a speaker to test, and test it with 3 different speaker configurations: 1. 7.1 2. 7.4 w/speakers configured as tops 3. 7.4 w/speakers configured as front/rear Do each of those three tests three times with the XMC-2 sound mode as: 1. Surround or stereo (depending on what signal you’re sending - the key is no upmixing) 2. DSU 3. Neural:X
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,756
Member is Online
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 22, 2020 19:43:48 GMT -5
I must have missed the loss of bit rate...how does one know that's happening? Mark As I've described it in the past, loss of bit rate is one of the ways I think it sounds. Others say dynamics. They could both be true or neither. One one hand, it sounds like significant bit rate loss, but it also seems to manifest into something that sounds like DRC. Got it...so it isn't that you know the bit rate has changed, it just sounds like it...so, kind of like if in stereo the difference between a very low res recording and a top notch one. And also, per one of the other posters, some are expecting sound out of certain speakers with Neural X and it's not there at all (as another issue). Right? So, if I get it right the distinct issues people are having are actually: 1) ~6 dB level drop 2) Audio quality isn't what they expect and it either: a) sounds less dynamic b) sounds like a lower quality audio recording (muddy, etc.) 3) Isn't playing all the speakers people think should be playing. Correct? I'm looking into how to do a survey that would isolate which issues people are having and how they might interact. Frankly, it looks like Survey Monkey would be the best tool to gather that data. The polling system here is pretty limited, but I can create a survey in Survey Monkey and include a link here. And, to be clear - my interest is to ensure Emotiva has the best possible problem definition. As I've said many times in my career, a problem well-defined is the first step to a solution. Mark
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 22, 2020 20:09:44 GMT -5
Not gonna be able to do any audio measurements tonight. Between the sound of hard rain and thunder, plus the fact that I'm cautious when lightning is around so I unplug the electrostatic speakers, so for now it's a no-go.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 22, 2020 20:23:22 GMT -5
As I've described it in the past, loss of bit rate is one of the ways I think it sounds. Others say dynamics. They could both be true or neither. One one hand, it sounds like significant bit rate loss, but it also seems to manifest into something that sounds like DRC. Got it...so it isn't that you know the bit rate has changed, it just sounds like it...so, kind of like if in stereo the difference between a very low res recording and a top notch one. And also, per one of the other posters, some are expecting sound out of certain speakers with Neural X and it's not there at all (as another issue). Right? So, if I get it right the distinct issues people are having are actually: 1) ~6 dB level drop 2) Audio quality isn't what they expect and it either: a) sounds less dynamic b) sounds like a lower quality audio recording (muddy, etc.) 3) Isn't playing all the speakers people think should be playing. Correct? I'm looking into how to do a survey that would isolate which issues people are having and how they might interact. Frankly, it looks like Survey Monkey would be the best tool to gather that data. The polling system here is pretty limited, but I can create a survey in Survey Monkey and include a link here. And, to be clear - my interest is to ensure Emotiva has the best possible problem definition. As I've said many times in my career, a problem well-defined is the first step to a solution. Mark Thanks Mark. No, I don't know that the bit rate is lower, and I'm having trouble explaining. When watching two scenes.. One with a 6k+ audio track and one with a 256k audio track... Same codec, with a good system, you can tell a huge difference between the two. In some ways, it's more dynamic, and in other ways, the compression kills the data, so it sounds worse. It's hard to decide whether it's the chicken or the egg. I'm saying it sounds similar to that to me. Dynamic range would only impact SPL, if I'm not mistaken, but this seems to just be missing data along with dynamic range issues along the front speakers. Maybe I can manage to confuse this more. 😂😂😂 I don't have a difference in volume anymore dependant upon anything other than DTS. If it is DTS, whether I'm in Surround or DTS Neural, I am between -10 and -12 on the volume knob. Any Dolby track is -18 or lower.
|
|
|
Post by jonstatt on Jun 24, 2020 5:03:30 GMT -5
As I've described it in the past, loss of bit rate is one of the ways I think it sounds. Others say dynamics. They could both be true or neither. One one hand, it sounds like significant bit rate loss, but it also seems to manifest into something that sounds like DRC. Got it...so it isn't that you know the bit rate has changed, it just sounds like it...so, kind of like if in stereo the difference between a very low res recording and a top notch one. And also, per one of the other posters, some are expecting sound out of certain speakers with Neural X and it's not there at all (as another issue). Right? So, if I get it right the distinct issues people are having are actually: 1) ~6 dB level drop 2) Audio quality isn't what they expect and it either: a) sounds less dynamic b) sounds like a lower quality audio recording (muddy, etc.) 3) Isn't playing all the speakers people think should be playing. Correct? I'm looking into how to do a survey that would isolate which issues people are having and how they might interact. Frankly, it looks like Survey Monkey would be the best tool to gather that data. The polling system here is pretty limited, but I can create a survey in Survey Monkey and include a link here. And, to be clear - my interest is to ensure Emotiva has the best possible problem definition. As I've said many times in my career, a problem well-defined is the first step to a solution. Mark Its not just that speakers are being left out, its sound that is completely gone which I believe is a redirect of sound to speakers that don't exist in the setup. As I mentioned earlier it is my belief that the 6dB or greater drop is lost sound energy that has been misdirected. This would explain why scene to scene its different. If the missing sound is some thunder from a storm it will sound like a loss of dynamic range. If its an explosion it may drop the midrange leaving the bass and making things sound muddy. In other scenes it may just be incidental atmospheric sound in which case it will hardlybe noticedand just sound quieter
|
|
|
Post by ttocs on Jun 24, 2020 6:42:48 GMT -5
^^^^^^ The comments by jonstatt seem very logical, more so than a difference of bitrate. But, without hard evidence it's still guessing. Since doing a lot of reading on this subject including articles and comments going back a few years, it is seeming more probable that setup - specifically distance/timing/levels - have an impact on the success/failure of this upmixer. I don't recall where I read one article which spoke about "tweaking" how well Neural:X worked based solely on speaker distance/levels which redirects where sounds travel. I'll try to locate that one. edit: Here's one article I see with good/bad about how Neural:X works and doesn't, and speaks about how sounds are treated differently vs Dolby. rantingsofamadaudiophile.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/dtsx-vs-dolby-atmos-part-ii-dolby-surround-vs-dts-neuralx/edit2: I have a theory about why the volume level might be lower with Neural:X. When doing room correction there is a target curve where frequencies are leveled DOWN to, hence, lowering the overall volume. When Neural:X is playing with sounds and frequencies and maybe (I don't know) phase, I'm wondering if this also plays to a "lowest common denominator". Further, in the article linked above, the author talks about how sounds are handled differently between different speaker setups so we cannot compare a 5.x.x setup to a 7.x.x setup - it just doesn't compare. They are different. So what I'm getting at here is, some setups work, and others don't. Please prove me wrong with demonstrable facts. Read the article, it says in one article what others are saying one little piece at a time. And, if someone could please provide text direct from DTS about "HOW" their system is "SUPPOSED" to work, then fantastic! Because I've been looking, but DTS isn't saying.
|
|
|
Post by markc on Jun 24, 2020 10:24:14 GMT -5
^^^^^^ The comments by jonstatt seem very logical, more so than a difference of bitrate. But, without hard evidence it's still guessing. Since doing a lot of reading on this subject including articles and comments going back a few years, it is seeming more probable that setup - specifically distance/timing/levels - have an impact on the success/failure of this upmixer. I don't recall where I read one article which spoke about "tweaking" how well Neural:X worked based solely on speaker distance/levels which redirects where sounds travel. I'll try to locate that one. edit: Here's one article I see with good/bad about how Neural:X works and doesn't, and speaks about how sounds are treated differently vs Dolby. rantingsofamadaudiophile.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/dtsx-vs-dolby-atmos-part-ii-dolby-surround-vs-dts-neuralx/edit2: I have a theory about why the volume level might be lower with Neural:X. When doing room correction there is a target curve where frequencies are leveled DOWN to, hence, lowering the overall volume. When Neural:X is playing with sounds and frequencies and maybe (I don't know) phase, I'm wondering if this also plays to a "lowest common denominator". Further, in the article linked above, the author talks about how sounds are handled differently between different speaker setups so we cannot compare a 5.x.x setup to a 7.x.x setup - it just doesn't compare. They are different. So what I'm getting at here is, some setups work, and others don't. Please prove me wrong with demonstrable facts. Read the article, it says in one article what others are saying one little piece at a time. And, if someone could please provide text direct from DTS about "HOW" their system is "SUPPOSED" to work, then fantastic! Because I've been looking, but DTS isn't saying. These are definitely enlightening: This guy has experimented with how audio phase variance is the key to DTS Neural:X function and how timing and delays are the key to Dolby Surround Upmixer Part 1 could be ignored as not that relevant to this, but a good enough read anyway: rantingsofamadaudiophile.wordpress.com/2017/05/07/dtsx-vs-dolby-atmos-is-there-any-difference-part-i/rantingsofamadaudiophile.wordpress.com/2017/05/20/dtsx-vs-dolby-atmos-part-ii-dolby-surround-vs-dts-neuralx/rantingsofamadaudiophile.wordpress.com/2018/05/22/dolby-atmos-vs-dts-x-update/
|
|