|
Post by bluescale on Jun 24, 2020 15:21:57 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. The problem with this theory is that when I move my not so great Denon receiver from the living room to the theater room, with the same speaker layout, it doesn't drop volume and make things sound muddy. Remember, some of us were experiencing this upmixing from just 5.1 to 7.1. You don't have to bring ceiling speakers, and the added complexity that brings into the equation, to experience this issue. It's certainly possible that this could be a setup issue, but it's not a setup issue that exists with other processors/receivers running Neural:X.
|
|
|
Post by markc on Jun 24, 2020 16:23:55 GMT -5
The problem with this theory is that when I move my not so great Denon receiver from the living room to the theater room, with the same speaker layout, it doesn't drop volume and make things sound muddy. Remember, some of us were experiencing this upmixing from just 5.1 to 7.1. You don't have to bring ceiling speakers, and the added complexity that brings into the equation, to experience this issue. It's certainly possible that this could be a setup issue, but it's not a setup issue that exists with other processors/receivers running Neural:X. Yes. I feel like a Groundhog Day or stuck broken record but from day one when I got my Emotiva I too have repeated this over and over and just a simple "We hear you and are looking into it" from Dan or Lonnie would be pacifying. With certainty, as nothing else explains it, the problem is with the Emotiva's implementation of Neural:X. I know for sure Marantz implements Neural:X transparently and as I would expect in a 7.2 and 7.2.4 setup with the 8805. Denon is part of the same company but either way, their implementation works. - The problem is DTS made an open system where Neural:X can take any speaker configuration that you care to have, but in order to get optimal results, the Surround Sound Processor has to communicate what speakers are in use in a way that Neural:X can understand.
- The problem in the current Emotiva's is probably with the way that Speaker Configuration setup communicates to DTS Neural:X about which speakers are active
- The problem in the Emotiva's is probably that something is getting lost in this translation and what the XMC-2/RMC-1 is communicating to the DTS Neural:X is not actually correct so that Neural :X is extracting audio to channels that do not exist,
- The Neural:X problem is present with 5.1 to 7.1 surround channel expansion. This is not possible without some serious programming error in the DSP! Dematrixing the two side surrounds of 5.1 to provide the additional two rear surrounds is simple, yet it doesn't work!
- Just fix it please! I have zero other issues. Dirac is an optional bolt on I would love as an enhancement whereas DTS sources are currently about 60+% of Blu-rays!
- Dirac implementation will not compensate for the defective Neural:X and the improvement gained from Dirac Live is smaller than the wrecking of 60% of Blu-ray audio that Emotiva's Neural:X implementation causes.
OK. I will try and stay mute until the next firmware release!
(nb. I am currently back to Firmware 1.10 after installing the leaked Beta firmware incorporating Dirac Live for the Dirac Beta testers. It had a serious flaw that reverting to 1.10 resolved. See the main XMC-2/ RMC-1 thread)
|
|
|
Post by bluescale on Jun 24, 2020 17:10:14 GMT -5
(nb. I am currently back to Firmware 1.10 after installing the leaked Beta firmware incorporating Dirac Live for the Dirac Beta testers. It had a serious flaw that reverting to 1.10 resolved. See the main XMC-2/ RMC-1 thread) What am I missing? I can't find any posts about a defect with the beta firmware (or even any mention of it being leaked).
|
|
klinemj
Emo VIPs
Honorary Emofest Scribe
Posts: 14,756
|
Post by klinemj on Jun 24, 2020 17:21:59 GMT -5
I was holding a bit before trying a different poll to better get at problem definition...mainly to gather better wording for various parts, and I've decided it's a non-starter. With so few noticing the problem and most of them who are vocal being very focused on what they think the problem is (vs. describing the end result of the problem) - it's unlikely we'd get useful info at this point. Net, I'm putting it on hold.
Mark
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 24, 2020 17:35:43 GMT -5
(nb. I am currently back to Firmware 1.10 after installing the leaked Beta firmware incorporating Dirac Live for the Dirac Beta testers. It had a serious flaw that reverting to 1.10 resolved. See the main XMC-2/ RMC-1 thread) What am I missing? I can't find any posts about a defect with the beta firmware (or even any mention of it being leaked). It was taken down I believe. Like many, many posts.
|
|
|
Post by davidl81 on Jun 24, 2020 18:12:20 GMT -5
What am I missing? I can't find any posts about a defect with the beta firmware (or even any mention of it being leaked). It was taken down I believe. Like many, many posts. I mean I kinda get it. It was a beta firmware. Beta’s are going to likely have bugs, that’s why the release them that way. It is of no benefit for general forum members to get all worked up about issues with a beta firmware. Now issues with a general release firmware are fair game.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 25, 2020 6:43:23 GMT -5
It was taken down I believe. Like many, many posts. I mean I kinda get it. It was a beta firmware. Beta’s are going to likely have bugs, that’s why the release them that way. It is of no benefit for general forum members to get all worked up about issues with a beta firmware. Now issues with a general release firmware are fair game. Yeah, I guess anyone would derive that I meant it was a bad thing. I agree, things that aren't meant for the general public, probably shouldn't be here. It was more of a dig about the obscene censorship on this forum. I should have made that more clear, or just not commented at all.
|
|
|
Post by steelman1991 on Jun 25, 2020 7:45:01 GMT -5
I mean I kinda get it. It was a beta firmware. Beta’s are going to likely have bugs, that’s why the release them that way. It is of no benefit for general forum members to get all worked up about issues with a beta firmware. Now issues with a general release firmware are fair game. Yeah, I guess anyone would derive that I meant it was a bad thing. I agree, things that aren't meant for the general public, probably shouldn't be here. It was more of a dig about the obscene censorship on this forum. I should have made that more clear, or just not commented at all.
Maybe I'm just not on the forums all that much lately, but I can't say "obscene censorship" is a criticism that could be levelled at the Mods, or Emo on these forums.
You fallen foul to some over eager moderation?
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 25, 2020 7:52:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I guess anyone would derive that I meant it was a bad thing. I agree, things that aren't meant for the general public, probably shouldn't be here. It was more of a dig about the obscene censorship on this forum. I should have made that more clear, or just not commented at all.
Maybe I'm just not on the forums all that much lately, but I can't say "obscene censorship" is a criticism that could be levelled at the Mods, or Emo on these forums.
You fallen foul to some over eager moderation?
For sure. But, it isn't just me. This forum is one of a few things I do out of boredom. Scroll through social media, some news, and the latest posts here. I probably check the latest posts a dozen times each day. So yeah, I've seen many things come and go. Most of it probably shouldn't be here, but I always subscribe to the "fix the problems and people will minimize the complaints" category. At any rate, it doesn't really matter and we are off topic on this thread. 🙂
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,196
|
Post by geebo on Jun 25, 2020 8:58:00 GMT -5
"obscene censorship"!? I've been here ten years now and I have to strongly disagree with that.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 25, 2020 9:00:49 GMT -5
"obscene censorship"!? I've been here ten years now and I have to strongly disagree with that. Alright, let's move on. This subject doesn't need numerous posts deterring from the topic. We are all welcome to our own thoughts of what obscene is.
|
|
geebo
Emo VIPs
"Too bad that all the people who know how to run the country are driving taxicabs and cutting hair"
Posts: 24,196
|
Post by geebo on Jun 25, 2020 9:35:07 GMT -5
"obscene censorship"!? I've been here ten years now and I have to strongly disagree with that. Alright, let's move on. This subject doesn't need numerous posts deterring from the topic. We are all welcome to our own thoughts of what obscene is. We are, indeed. But you brought it up. So yes, lets stay on topic.
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Jun 28, 2020 8:29:00 GMT -5
That’s not what was implied by your comment though. You were suggesting that Surround might not even be working properly because you had no sounds from “top/heights” in that mode. Of course I didn’t. If following this thread it was written in context. You had to have read my previous posts. But maybe I should write each comment as a new comment to not be misinterpreted.. The sound is better (and higher in volume) with heights chosen in setup rather than tops. This with surround mode used and output only to 5.1 speakers. Hope this is clear enough? Why tops drag down surround mode in a straight output is really strange though. If I hadn’t switched between these speaker settings I would never have noticed this.
|
|
|
Post by megash0n on Jun 28, 2020 9:51:51 GMT -5
That’s not what was implied by your comment though. You were suggesting that Surround might not even be working properly because you had no sounds from “top/heights” in that mode. Of course I didn’t. If following this thread it was written in context. You had to have read my previous posts. But maybe I should write each comment as a new comment to not be misinterpreted.. The sound is better (and higher in volume) with heights chosen in setup rather than tops. This with surround mode used and output only to 5.1 speakers. Hope this is clear enough? Why tops drag down surround mode in a straight output is really strange though. If I hadn’t switched between these speaker settings I would never have noticed this. I think a lot more people need to do this sort of testing to realize they too have issues.
|
|
|
Post by jh714 on Jun 28, 2020 10:12:18 GMT -5
So I have not had time to do a lot of watching but... I'm a 7.2.4 Set up. My XMC-2 is using Firmware 1.10. I've played 2 discs, both DTS Master HD 5.1. My subs are set to dual mono; my fronts are set Large and all the other speakers are set small. The only difference in my 2 Presets are the ".4" speakers. On one they are set at "TOPS"; on the other "HEIGHTS". If there is a decrease in volume - I don't notice it. Let me ad, that I LIKE volume! In both cases, I thought that the discs sounded better than ever. I did switch between the 2 Presets, on both discs. In both cases, their was a subtle difference, but not a lot. In both cases, I preferred "Height". I'm thinking that I will finally watch a true DTS-X disc tonight, but.... Even if you switch between Surround and DTS Neural:X mode? Don’t you notice a slight drop in the volume of the voices? It’s sometimes harder to notice the first times, but once you noticed it... It’s easier to notice with good recordings as well. I actually first watched The Others and did not notice any difference. Then put on some live music and noticed it straight away. So now that I have had the chance to watch a number of different movies; I've had straight Dolby Atmos....no issues, Both Dolby up mix and DTS Neural:X and yes, there is a slight difference in volume. I did not measure it but, it is not enough to get me all worked up....I just turn the volume up to where I want it. I could easily dismiss it as the difference between the two company's processes. I mean, I can also hear small differences on how and what certain sounds come out of different speakers. I'm finally going to get a chance to watch straight DTS:X....I purchased the Jason Bourne collection.
|
|
|
Post by jh714 on Jun 28, 2020 10:22:48 GMT -5
I am intrigued to know a bit more about the one person who had no problem with Neural:X AND has heights in use as well as Tops. That one vote is an outlier and doesn't fit the rest of the data, so is likely to be suspect If you are referring to me, let me re-describe what I am doing.... My "immersive speakers" are above the listener, very much like shown in the Dolby Atmos speaker guide. When you do your speaker setup, you have your choice of labeling the speakers "Height" or "Top". Since you can do two "Preset" setups, I setup Preset 1 with "Heights", and Preset 2 with "Tops", really just to see if I can tell any difference by switching between presets.
|
|
|
Post by doc1963 on Jun 28, 2020 11:03:29 GMT -5
Even if you switch between Surround and DTS Neural:X mode? Don’t you notice a slight drop in the volume of the voices? It’s sometimes harder to notice the first times, but once you noticed it... It’s easier to notice with good recordings as well. I actually first watched The Others and did not notice any difference. Then put on some live music and noticed it straight away. So now that I have had the chance to watch a number of different movies; I've had straight Dolby Atmos....no issues, Both Dolby up mix and DTS Neural:X and yes, there is a slight difference in volume. I did not measure it but, it is not enough to get me all worked up....I just turn the volume up to where I want it. I could easily dismiss it as the difference between the two company's processes. I mean, I can also hear small differences on how and what certain sounds come out of different speakers. I'm finally going to get a chance to watch straight DTS:X....I purchased the Jason Bourne collection. I found the same results as you. However, I did choose to vote “yes” in the poll. Unlike some (or most) other posters here, I did have an alternate point of reference. This issue came to light before I took delivery of my RMC-1L and while my AV8805 was still in control of my system. I took a good amount of time to compare and take notes and found that there’s no “noticeable” differences in volume between DSU and DTS Neural:X on the 8805. It also did not matter whether “tops” or “heights” were configured. Changing to “heights”, however, did allow me to also compare Auro 3D. I’ll leave that alone, but wow, that’s a great up-mixer. So while I do not find the reduction in volume do find in my RMC-1L to be a “big deal”, it apparently is not “normal” and should be looked into as soon as possible. When “we” become too dismissive of even small issues, so do they and nothing ever becomes of it. Also, if you’re looking for a great “native” DTS:X title that will showcase the sheer prowess of your XMC-2, try “Fate of the Furious”...
|
|
|
Post by steelman1991 on Jun 28, 2020 11:04:45 GMT -5
Of course I didn’t. If following this thread it was written in context. You had to have read my previous posts. But maybe I should write each comment as a new comment to not be misinterpreted.. The sound is better (and higher in volume) with heights chosen in setup rather than tops. This with surround mode used and output only to 5.1 speakers. Hope this is clear enough? Why tops drag down surround mode in a straight output is really strange though. If I hadn’t switched between these speaker settings I would never have noticed this. I think a lot more people need to do this sort of testing to realize they too have issues. Done it already and guess what....... realise I don’t have the issues. I bowed out of this discussion before and now I feel I should again because I just don’t get it. Good luck with your quest.
|
|
|
Post by jh714 on Jun 28, 2020 11:15:49 GMT -5
So now that I have had the chance to watch a number of different movies; I've had straight Dolby Atmos....no issues, Both Dolby up mix and DTS Neural:X and yes, there is a slight difference in volume. I did not measure it but, it is not enough to get me all worked up....I just turn the volume up to where I want it. I could easily dismiss it as the difference between the two company's processes. I mean, I can also hear small differences on how and what certain sounds come out of different speakers. I'm finally going to get a chance to watch straight DTS:X....I purchased the Jason Bourne collection. I found the same results as you. However, I did choose to vote “yes” in the poll. Unlike some (or most) other posters here, I did have an alternate point of reference. This issue came to light before I took delivery of my RMC-1L and while my AV8805 was still in control of my system. I took a good amount of time to compare and take notes and found that there’s no “noticeable” differences in volume between DSU and DTS Neural:X on the 8805. It also did not matter whether “tops” or “heights” were configured. Changing to “heights”, however, did allow me to also compare Auro 3D. I’ll leave that alone, but wow, that’s a great up-mixer. So while I do not find the reduction in volume to be a “big deal”, it apparently is not “normal” and should be looked into as soon as possible. When “we” become too dismissive of even small issues, so do they and nothing ever becomes of it. Also, if you’re looking for a great “native” DTS:X title that will showcase the sheer prowess of your XMC-2, try “Fate of the Furious”... Thanks for the recommendation. As you might have guessed, I voted NO. It took watching a number of different discs, from movies to concert films, and seriously listening and comparing, before I could/can say that the reduced volume is definitely there. I think that you really have to sit, listen, and purposely compare the same tracks over and over. If you are seriously trying to watch a movie - that is flat annoying, so you have to be into 'the investigation'. When it's sunny and 85 degrees, I'm not sitting in the room in front of my TV. Lol, even at night, it's even nicer on the deck with a cocktail and Zone 2 playing Ozzie's Boneyard thru my EMO outdoor speakers!
|
|
|
Post by hsamwel on Jun 28, 2020 11:28:16 GMT -5
I did see your post, and I would never say keep quiet. There is no doubt you have taken measurements and have data. You, megashon, and markc have been quite clear and vocal about what you are hearing (and for some of you - measuring). That said - I don't think you are listening (reading) my point. Let me be perfectly clear: There could be a hardware or FW issue with the Emo pre/pro's causing the issue OR...OR....OR...and read this carefully...it COULD be a setup issue or a source issue. ALL I am asking is that you and the other remain open to that possibility and test that thoroughly. I've been closely following this, and I don't see that being done. Don't like my suggested test on setup? Propose another. As far as Emotiva's response...what would YOU say if you shipped a boatload of units and some folks (a very small %) say there's a problem, but...several reputable other users can't replicate it? (And, knowing Emotiva, they have tried and they can't either.) Try to help them get to the root cause AND admit that maybe...it's not on their end. Mark (PS...I'm out unless I can add any more input in how to test for the root cause. Meanwhile, I tried to drum up more responses to help you guys and got almost nothing, and I suggested a test and only 1 has shown interest in looking into it.) Let us say it was configuration on source end. A dedicated Blu-ray player - say Oppo - should eliminate that. Setup issue could certainly be a possibility. All that's left for me Is PEQ. That shouldn't cause channels to disappear. XMC2 lost all channels except LR & subs during DTS disc testing. Fixed temporarily after power switch cycle and then returned. That is not a configuration issue. Yes 6db loss. This is buggy. I'm busy messing with router bandwith issues and don't have time for another project. Configuration is not the cause. RMC-1 does not have ANY configuration other than speaker settings regarding how upmixers sound or handles.. From my blu-ray player I have the same issue wether I use PCM or bitstreamed DTS. DRC or similar is not active on DTS. Although this is off on my player. It could very well be firmware. Although I have done a factory reset and the issue persists. Can I reinstall firmware 1.10 again? Or must I install another version first?
|
|