Secrets of the Dolby Atmos Home Theater
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 тра 2024
- Your Questions Wanted! Do you have questions about Home Theater, Acoustics, AV equipment and scinece that you want me to address in my upcoming videos? Just drop them below in comments , and if you want to GUARANTEE your question gets answered in my future videos, simply add "$THANKS" to your comment. Your support is invaluable, and I can't wait to delve into your inquiries and make these videos even more engaging together!
If you'd like to book a private acoustic consultation with me or interested in purchasing the right Home Theater equipment please send your request through our website: www.poesacoustics.com
We proudly carry Perlisten speakers, Real Acoustix acoustic treatments, Trinnov processer, RTJ subwoofers, etc.
Follow me:
UA-cam: Subscribe to this Channel / poesacoustics
Website: www.poesacoustics.com/
Facebook: / poesacoustics
Instagram: / poesacoustics
Email: matt@poesacoustics.com - Наука та технологія
This video was literally the proof that I was totally wrong about how atmos should be. I was trying to pin point where my overhead effects were coming from and oftentimes getting frustrated because I couldn’t tell which speaker was playing the atmos effects. It was never meant to be like that. Thanks Matt and like always your knowledge is insane.
Great video to help raise awareness of the importance of timbre matching of Atmos speakers.
Thanks! Yes it’s become a bigger and bigger issue.
That's why I like having the Spatial Audio Calibration Toolkit handy. I can show people visually an object moving around the room and how it matches up to the sound in the actual room. It gives me a reference for any tonal changes as objects move around the array as well.
Thanks!
This is very generous. Thank you very much.
Perfectly said, as always Matthew. Respect!
Great video and you are entirely right about timber matching and sould level matching
Excellent video!
Well done 👏🏼 👍🏼 and thank you for the info 🏴🇬🇧
Thanks!
Can you provide your thoughts and approach when placing speakers for an immersive codec agnostic design? It seems there is considerable debate on placement and aiming of all speakers in home theater for optimal immersive performance. Would you consider doing a video on what you feel is best practice for selecting location and angle for aimable typical DI speakers for height and surrounds in a medium sized dedicated home theater (14’-16’ W x 18’-22’ L x 8’-10’ H)?
For context of my question, Home Theater Guru’s addresses the Dolby Atmos HT reference guide (which is pretty much known in our community to not necessarily be best practice) and suggests what he feels to be the optimal specific placement location angles relative to the MLP for all the speakers. He then aims them based essentially by ear based on their soundstage characteristics respective of their dispersion. He prefers all speakers be aimable to accomplish this, vs. flat in wall/ceiling. Auro specifies front heights placed essentially in the same vertical plane as the LCR, which results in a proposed to be at 30 degrees vertically from the MLP. Some feel that Atmos performs better with front heights in this position as well.
Can you provide your thoughts and approach when placing and aiming speakers for an immersive codec agnostic design for a single MLP and multi seat MLP row? You could even specify exactly where you would place speakers for a 7.x.4 system in a theoretical 15 x 20 x 9 room.
Gary
Hey Mathew
Excellent Excellent Excellent walk through common sense sound theory(s).
I agree with you on the theory of timbre matched end points. In fact I myself noted around 2005 that identical units gave me that next level of realism as a bus or a bullet passed thru a 360degree panning along my bed layer. At least it whistled down most of the differences in performance leaving only room variables left to treat, for me anyway.
God Bless 🙏👍
Matt your knowledge is so well presented and practical. It's presented in a refreshing way that isn't influenced by pushing products like so many other UA-camrs. You are a true professional.
I really appreciate the comment and support. Obviously I sell gear and the gear I sell I promote in the sense that I think it’s good. But I do try to be balanced and share information that is generally useful. Not to simply say, X product is the best.
Thanks very helpful even though I only have 5.1(2)
While maybe implied inh the video, in addition to timbre matching and at least full band performance (80Hz) performance, power handling is also key. There a a number of films where the Atmos speakers are playing at LCR levels - if not more
Hey Matt, I couldn't agree more with your points on overhead speakers, and expectations. Also, having all great matched full-range speaker future proofs your system. Imagine if/when your speakers can actively help real-time with challenging rooms/frequencies. I vaguely remember you hinting at this awhile back. Maybe a future version Dirac?
Technically ART already can do this at low frequencies. Limited by the dynamic capabilities of the speakers for a given bandwidth.
How does a sloped ceiling affect room sound dynamics , in your opinion? Also my room setup is so that the tv in on the long wall of the room (rectangular room with sloped ceiling from 8 to 16 ft). In your opinion did I make a mistake by placing tv and couch parallel to long walls?
I like to look for speaker lines that use the same mid and tweeter and the same crossover points across the whole lineup.
Center channels usually deviate the most, often cramming in a smaller midrange driver. One solution would be to use the center channel model for all the other speakers too. But then the lobing effects of WTMW are multiplied.
Which then turns my favor towards concentric drivers. But most center channels with concentric drivers also have woofers flanking them in a WCW configuration. Is that really so different? A consideration I feel lends it’s self to considering the bandwidth of the concentric driver and the output levels it’s capable of if we were to crossover the concentric driver directly to our powered subwoofers, or low enough to comfortably avoid most of the lobing effects.
Because a concentric speaker is usually crossing the side speakers very low, it’s not a huge issue. You can see this in the vertical of Kef towers at Erin’s Audio Corner.
Im surprised you didnt discuss number of height speakers and their positioning. Such a hot topic.
It’s probably a worthy topic but then you can say that about all the channels. To me that is simply about not having the angle between adjacent channels be too high. That is how I make those design decisions.
I've been going back and fourth on what to build for Atmos speakers thinking, "it's just Atmos", maybe I don't need anything special. Based on your video however maybe I need to build dipole CBT arrays similar to the rest of the speakers in the theater. I'm not sure exactly how I want to go about that however.
The mains, center and sides are full dipole CBT and the rear are inverted ground plane dipole CBT. I'll have to think about how to deal with the Atmos. The sides and rear are both pretty big (over 4 ft tall) so I don't really think it will be practical to mount anything comparable in size on the ceiling. It may be a bit challenging to figure out the best solution.
Full range at every channel is the way sound signals should be produced. I'm glad that systems can sound great without having to put amazing speakers in every location though.
I fully agree with you that it's better to do that, and there absolutely is a point to go full amazing with every speaker in your system. Just not a BIG point and most content won't be THAT much more amazing by doing so. Kinda like going from a BluRay to a 8K movie won't really make a movie that much better!
I thought my atmos sounded louder then the rest at a level match so i set the atmos 2 db lower then the rest and it seems to blend better with everything else.
Thanks for the video, keep these up! One thought about levels I think I heard from Anthony Grimani in another video: since our ears face forward, what I think he suggested was to level balance based on what our ears hear. When I used a SPL meter and calibrated all of my speakers to 75db, I noticed the atmos speakers didn't sound as loud as the rest. By increasing the Atmos speakers a couple db, they then sounded the same level as my front sound stage. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this suggestion. Agree with your point though, that dialing up many db just to hear Atmos effects louder isn't a good idea.
I don’t necessarily do this. But I do use sweeps or pink noise measurement of all speakers and align. An SPL meter can give a false reading if the response differs enough. I’ve had that happen before.
Are your atmos tops directed at your like your mains are? If not then you are probably running your tops off axis to the listing position
@@njrumenos and this is one of the reasons for using frequency response measurements to level match. We level set using pink noise and dBC SPL. The pink noise is special bandwidth limited pink noise. This prevents the effect of being off-axis from impacting the SPL. But it was designed for large commercial cinemas. And homes are quite different. More severe off-axis issues. So you can get a perceived lower SPL and need to adjust a little. Or EQ differently. Or aim, which can be the best solution. It really depends a lot on the speaker. Some in ceiling or ceiling mounted speakers do have very wide dispersion and so this is less of an issue.
@@njrumenos They are pointed to me. I think Grimani's point was our ears hear a lot better with stuff in front of us rather than above and especially from behind. A mic or SPL meter is omnidirectional so the SPL measured isn't the same as what our ears perceive. My front Atmos sounded louder than my rear Atmos even though all 4 were calibrated to the same 75db SPL. And the bed layer speakers were louder than all 4 Atmos. I decided to change the levels up about 1.5db so that everything sounded similar to my ears.
@@NMP660 when you say they sounded louder what are you referring to? Content playback or during calibration?
Comparing dvd, bluray, 4k soundtracks is a good idear for a video series🙏
Aside from Gravity: Diamond Luxe Edition atmos track, what movie demo/scene do you use to listen and test an Atmos system?
I actually use music a lot because it’s making more use of Atmos. I use a lot of films others use such as the new Top Gun Maverick, Avatar 2, etc. But to really tell coherence and consistency of pans, I prefer music encoded in atmos played from Tidal and Apple Music.
I am ashamed to admit it, but Tiesto’s Boom is a great track for this.
NFL football boost the surrounds more so than movies. People might have the expectations set with sports surround.
Allllrighty then! Got me a ATMOS on sale at the walmart! TURN UP THE DAMN ATMOS! IT NEEDS MORE BASS!
Great content, it would be nice to hear what you have to say about placement of atmos tops
Yes, exactly, there seems much controversy over placement of Atmos height speakers … eg., directly above bed layer speakers (like Auro 3D advises) or a closer to MLP object based inner “sound bubble” for the overheads. Very confusing!
@@JanosWalter1 yes exactly my thoughts after hearing people on UA-cam using the Dolby rendering tool to display where atmos speakers should be place, it is very confusing hearing completely different perspectives
@@JanosWalter1 no controversy. One person thinks they should match Auro. Everyone else thinks they should go where Dolby has always said. No experts agree with the counter view.
@@PoesAcoustics this was my thoughts exactly
@@PoesAcoustics we are all just amateurs / enthusiasts compared to your good self but couldn't agree more. Overall just a great post.
Most of us have 4 heights capability and having tried it high on the walls front / rear or the extreme front / rear of the on ceiling, Atmos channels sounds crap there simply put. It's just too far from the listening position.
The solution is not to keep that speaker layout and up the channel count and go a set of top middles since as you point out many home atmos mixes will then fold the .4 into the top middles. So then you set your processor back to .4 instead of .6 - to hear 4 channels then you are back to all 4 Amos channels being too far away.
People following the advice of that one individual are simply in for a less optimal experience. The biggest issue with this is that it's no small thing to put speakers in or on your ceiling. It's like real effort with WAF factor for many and so on. You want your first choice to be the right one. I see people just swallowing the cool aid on it though.
End rant I guess I should say about now 🙂
I definitely don't like when my surrounds and/or heights call attention to themselves, especially with music. My speakers are all Kef from Ref to R to Q heights. They match pretty well AFAIK.
this is how i see it done in music atmos studios but it does get very expensive when you pick a great LCR so the real question is do you compromise the LCR (in output and linearity, mostly output) for matching surrounds or not
In high end home cinemas or in studios, you can have everything be great. Many of the best brands have matching speakers that won’t compromise.
In the studios I’ve designed or worked on, the studio requires the use of Meyer sound Bluehorn. That is part of a system that has timbre matched surrounds. Obviously the Bluehorn Monitor is a step above the rest. But they match and it all works.
@@PoesAcoustics that part is obvious but im talking about the mid end system and lower where those compromises have to be made
So important to match all speakers....watch THE CREATOR....panning music will convince the nay-sayers!
I meant to say 32 not 34 channels. Sorry! Slip of the tongue.
Why is it that the right way is always the most expensive way?
Just saw the latest planet of the apes in Dbox ATMOS the front stage was incredible I could not hear anything else. I saw wides surrounds and height wides and atmos speakers but heard nothing other than the front stage. Very disappointed. It might have been the film but the front stage with the bass shakers didn’t disappoint. There is a bridge over rapids and it was realistic for a moment. That was immersive so it might have came on briefly but maybe the mix was an opportunity lost or the theater was saving on energy and shut off amps, only 5 people in the theater. I drove 90 minutes for a loud front stage. Good film. I had a better experience in an unlicensed theater watching dune 2 I I would think that was 7.? The point is atmos right now is still a gimmick to most studios and we are spending a ton of money for it. I need a real experience not colored by people making these. Bad decisions in change my volumes and gains after calibration and before I decide.
I saw this film two time this week. Once in a PDX Atmos and again in IMAX. The Atmos sounded super with nice split sounds and height channels. However the IMAX was front loaded only and loud. This was the first time at this IMAX and it was really LieMAX. No overhead or surrounds channels with speakers only in the back corners.
The secret of Dolby is up mixing to Auro3D 🤭
Thats one way, but you wont feel the need to do that if you use good bookshelf speakers aimed at the listening area. A good Atmos mix will sound phenomenal. If its a bad Atmos mix.....well just upmix it!
The secret to that is it’s no longer discrete object based surround anymore. You can’t upmix Atmos.
So I actually don’t agree with the idea of using bookshelves necessarily.
I believe the argument for this came from the idea that the bookshelf is a better quality speaker than many in ceilings and is being aimed at as I pointed out in the video, aiming only changes the spectral balance. It doesn’t enhance the top effect. That’s a myth. But it does introduce a problem. Diffraction off the baffle and around the speaker causes response issues.
So if we take a step back and define the optimal ceiling speaker for performance, it’s an aimed baffle mounted speaker. That gives the best coverage and the best response. The problem is that many such options are not of great quality. JBL and to a far greater extent, Perlisten offer exceptions to this. They are extremely high quality in ceiling speakers with an aimed lobe. Kef, Pro Audio Tech, and others feel that aiming isn’t important, just a wide smooth dispersion.
Grimani takes a different approach that I also appreciate. It’s a low profile ceiling surface mounted speaker with an aimed lobe. This does introduce some diffraction. But he fixes it with absorption and diffusion surrounding the speaker.
So I wouldn’t agree that a bookshelf is the greatest ideal for tops. It’s actually one of the more severely compromises options. It’s main advantage is that at the lower price point, it’s hard to find a good in ceiling that equals the bookshelf option for the same price. I do think that the angled surface mount surrounds offered by some brands may be a good option similar to Grimani. Again, it’s still not better than the aimed in ceiling option, due to diffraction effects. But it’s better than a deep large bookshelf hanging off an angled mount over 12” from the ceiling.
@@PoesAcoustics actually you can. There is a model of Yamaha receiver that can actually use the objects with Auromatic upmixing. Its the only one that can do it as far as I know and its fairly new (been out a year or so?)
I'm curious if the new AuroCX will have that capability or will Dolby block such efforts.
I have also heard that Storm's proprietary upmixer can use Atmos objects as well but havent seen confirmation of this. The Yamaha being able to do it was confirmed by Auro reps.
@@FURognar I am not sure what a Yamaha is doing. I am going to go out on a limb and argue it’s not upmixing. It’s enhancing the ambience, which is what StormXT does (I checked with Storm to confirm before responding). They don’t add direct cues, which upmixers do, they extract the decorrelated content from adjacent channels and add it into underused channels. It is different from upmixing. Yamahas ambience enhancing 3D effects were similarly never considered upmixers for the same reason.
In my opinion these are just silly effects. It’s not intended to get at director intent. It’s just designed to make people happy who like and want all channels active all the time.
Hmm, as for the speaker levels - the only person that should like the system is the owner, not the seller / engineer etc.
Not everyone feels that is true. This is similar to uncompromising chefs who feel that the patrons don’t decide how a dish should be served or eaten. It’s the chef that created the art and wants it conveyed as intended. With home theaters, there is a similar argument. That the director had an intent and it’s our job to serve the movies with that intent intact. Consumers or the owner can corrupt it, be unhappy, and not realize what the core problem actually is.
I don’t disagree with the idea that the owner can do what he wants with his system. But I also have true stories of clients being unhappy with their systems, only to find the system transformed once setup correctly and played back at correct levels.
The idea that these guys are putting a lot of work in the mix is absurd. I said this on the “lower your bass” video as well. I agree the owner is the only person that matters
Agreed. Sometimes the levels can vary on the exact same movie depending on the format its released on (streaming, blu ray or 4k disc) or even where it's released in the theaters (dolby cinema, imax etc) Who's to say which format of the release is correct? Ultimately should be the end users preference.
TLDR: That is fucking awesome, but it's not gonna make your movie that much better! Being able to turn it up and not piss your family or roommates off is!
Thanks!
Can you provide your thoughts and approach when placing speakers for an immersive codec agnostic design? It seems there is considerable debate on placement and aiming of all speakers in home theater for optimal immersive performance. Would you consider doing a video on what you feel is best practice for selecting location and angle for aimable typical DI speakers for height and surrounds in a medium sized dedicated home theater (14’-16’ W x 18’-22’ L x 8’-10’ H)?
For context of my question, Home Theater Guru’s addresses the Dolby Atmos HT reference guide (which is pretty much known in our community to not necessarily be best practice) and suggests what he feels to be the optimal specific placement location angles relative to the MLP for all the speakers. He then aims them based essentially by ear based on their soundstage characteristics respective of their dispersion. He prefers all speakers be aimable to accomplish this, vs. flat in wall/ceiling. Auro specifies front heights placed essentially in the same vertical plane as the LCR, which results in a proposed to be at 30 degrees vertically from the MLP. Some feel that Atmos performs better with front heights in this position as well.
Can you provide your thoughts and approach when placing and aiming speakers for an immersive codec agnostic design for a single MLP and multi seat MLP row? You could even specify exactly where you would place speakers for a 7.x.4 system in a theoretical 15 x 20 x 9 room.
Gary
PS Enjoy the $10 tip, I didn't refresh my browser and thought I had messed something up :)
Thank you for the question and $thanks. I’ll make sure to answer it in my upcoming videos
@@PoesAcoustics That will awesome. Thanks Matthew!