# Receiver Surround modes, What should you use?



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

As more and more surround modes become available on new receivers the confusion over what mode I should use for a particular surround format on DVDs and BluRay movies.

Below is a bit of info as to what works best with what format.

[img]http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:GMgdvmuTeNQXMM:http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2007/01/10/496799/Dolby.jpg[/img]Since the early 1990's Dolby surround formats have been available for home use to the general public. I wont get into the technical details as it is not necessary but if you wish you can find lots of information here.
Basically if you have a receiver that is less than 10 years old it will have several Dolby formats available to you. 




[img]http://tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:5fwvdaNRPj1W5M:http://images.techtree.com/ttimages/story/74647_dts.jpg[/img]Within the last few years several new formats have popped up including Dolby Digital EX, Dolby Tru HD, DTS ES and DTS Master audio More info on DTS formats here.
In the early years of surround Dolby Pro logic was the only format available to us at home and was a non digital format meaning that all the information was simply embedded into the two analog stereo channels and then sent to a centre channel and two rear speakers that were mono. Several receiver companies Yamaha being one of the first also added several theatre modes and other room and Stadium surround modes that in there day were fantastic.

With the consumer market expanding and demand for better home theater rooms, companies needed to come up with the same formats that were originally only available to those theaters. 

DVDs have over the past 8 years or so made available digital surround formats allowing up to 6 channels and one subwoofer mix to be used. Now with BluRay and HD DVD's offering us newer uncompressed formats the envelope has expanded to the point that you can get even better sound than any commercial theater right in your own home, offering up to 7 channels and one subwoofer mix in fully uncompressed audio meaning that the sound is as close to the original recording as possible.

This is where the confusion begins for many newcomers to home theater.
First lets look at what choices you have,
On a standard DVD you usually only had a few choices and only two of them would be a digital format. Dolby digital 5.1 is the most common by far and is just what it says, 5 channels and 1 sub channel. You may also see the option to use ocationally Dolby digital EX/DTS ES basically the same mix but with an added 6th rear channel but most people only had a receiver capable of decoding just the 5 channels and sub.
Today this is not the case, alot of receivers have full 7 speaker outputs along with a sub or even two. So the question is if your using a receiver with all 7 speakers hooked up what format is best in order to hear sound out of all 7 speakers.

First lets get one thing clear. If you have a receiver that supports the newest audio formats (DTS MA & Dolby TruHD) and your using a BluRay player. The only two ways that you can use these formats is if you are connected to the receiver with a HDMI cable or your BluRay player has multi channel analog outputs on the back and you run them into the inputs on the receiver.

On all movies there will be a audio menu, in this menu you will have choices as to what surround format you want to use. If your receiver only has 5.1 channels do not select the modes that have more such as 6.1 or 7.1. If you have a 7.1 channel receiver and you only have 5.1 hooked up this is not necessary as the receiver will automatically take the extra channel(s) and put them into the 4th and 5th channels if you have it set up properly.
Another question I get alot is if "_I have a 7.1 speaker setup and the audio format on the movie is only 5.1 what do I use_?" If you simply use the default mode on your receiver corresponding to the one selected on the movie you will not hear anything out of the rear speakers. You will need to find a mode that can extrapolate the information from the 5.1 mix and it will send it also to the 6th and 7th channels.
On my receiver I have several THX modes that will do this automatically but you must have a THX certified receiver to have access to these modes. Your manual will explain the modes available to you so have a look there.

I hope this information helps, If you have any questions or comments feel free to do them in this post.


----------



## TonyLS (Sep 26, 2008)

Great post, thanks for all the info.

Based on this I'm not able to get Dolby True HD, I don't think my Onkyo 503 receiver supports True HD or DTS Master Audio, it would have to, right? Also I'm using an optical cable from the blue ray into my receiver not HDMI. I am using HDMI for video directly into my 1080 tv. I heard using HDMI for both audio and video into my receiver will degrade the video. It's not a very high end receiver.

Why does Dolbly true HD/DTS-MA require HDMI for audio? Why can't optical support it?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

TonyLS said:


> Great post, thanks for all the info.
> 
> Based on this I'm not able to get Dolby True HD, I don't think my Onkyo 503 receiver supports True HD or DTS Master Audio, it would have to, right?


Yes it would but you have other options to make it work.
does your receiver have multi channel analog inputs? if so you can output the DTS MA and TruHD using the Bluray players analog outputs to the receiver that way. The bluray player has the ability to decode the uncompressed formats its self you just have to tell it to in the players menu.


> Also I'm using an optical cable from the blue ray into my receiver not HDMI. I am using HDMI for video directly into my 1080 tv. I heard using HDMI for both audio and video into my receiver will degrade the video. It's not a very high end receiver.


Video through the receiver being degraded is a possibility but not always, the way you have it now will work just fine.



> Why does Dolbly true HD/DTS-MA require HDMI for audio? Why can't optical support it?


This was a decision made buy the powers that be, It is a sort of copywrite protection.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

I thought the reason Optical couldn't handle HD audio signals was due to bandwidth issues. That due to the light having to travel usually over 3 feet that its bandwidth was having issues carrying the HD signal or something. I can't remember exactly, but something close to that effect.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Optical is more than capable of handling the uncompressed formats. Dolby Digital plus as well as DTS both have high bitrates and work fine over optical.
Fiber optics is used in many commercial networking systems and has alot more bandwidth than you may think.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

I thought so too, but i went researching that kind of stuff, but didnt find many sites that helped. Only one or 2 that went into depth about bandwidth or stuff with fiber optics. So, I guess that site wasnt of much help, or maybe on a different topic.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

I did find that 6 channel audio is the maximum allowed over optical but again this is just a rule not that it is not capable of doing more.
Another interesting tidbit is that DTS MA uncompressed audio carries by default a lossy core which can be read by regular DTS decoders but dont read this wrong it is not uncompressed in this format just a high quality lossy track.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

What does Lossy mean?


----------



## TonyLS (Sep 26, 2008)

it seems that my components will not support Dolbly true HD or DTS-MA. So now for the $69,000 question. Would I notice the difference???


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

the_rookie said:


> What does Lossy mean?


Lossy is basically the compressed format. MP3's are Lossy for example.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

TonyLS said:


> it seems that my components will not support Dolbly true HD or DTS-MA. So now for the $69,000 question. Would I notice the difference???


If you have a good speaker system then yes you would hear a difference but if your using small bookshelves and a small sub then most likely not.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

Even if you had a 1000$ per speaker set up, you might not see a difference even. Not everyone has the ears for it.

But it goes back to a discussion the forum had a long time ago, which is does the concept of all this just make you think it sounds better? Like using the Monster speaker cable and all that stuff for every connection, spending that 100$ for it compared to 11$ sure in makes you hope it was worth it. as well as even think you see more colors or better contrast ratio


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

the_rookie said:


> Even if you had a 1000$ per speaker set up, you might not see a difference even. Not everyone has the ears for it.


True but remember if you can tell the difference between a good quality mp3 file and the real CD recording then the same will be true for the difference between regular Dolby digital and the uncompressed formats.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

Hmm, I was wanting to continue our talk bout this.

On wikipedia I was researching Dolby HD, and DTS HD, and saw this for the Dolby HD part.



> S/PDIF cannot carry Dolby TrueHD due to bandwidth limitations, as S/PDIF is limited to 5.1 channels of compressed discrete audio. When using S/PDIF, a device such as a Blu-ray Disc player will automatically send the Dolby Digital audio.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yes, That is correct Dolby TruHD and DTS MA can only be sent over HDMI. But this is not only due to bandwidth limitations it is also a copy protection rule.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

Well than Tony, we should correct this error on Wikipedia than.


----------



## Bailman (Nov 21, 2006)

the_rookie said:


> Well than Tony, we should correct this error on Wikipedia than.


Werd! :mooooh::mooooh::mooooh: :bigsmile:


----------



## mgrace47 (Jul 24, 2008)

I still have questions about listening modes. My set-up: Onkyo TX-SR805 with 7.1 speakers, HDMI connections, so I get all of the sound choices. But there are so many sound choices with this unit, I get confused over which is best other than through experimentation (which sometimes gets difficult, switching between modes while trying trying to hear differences in various speakers around the room.) For example, if a movie has a DTS track would be it be best to just play it in DTS? Sometimes, I think the Ultra Cinema 2 sounds better. Also, what about THX modes? What do these offer that others do not. Are there guidelines to follow? Thanks.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Keep in mind that the THX modes like Ultra Cinema 2 (the one I use alot) is placed on top of the DTS track for example so your not degrading DTS only enhancing it so it spreads the audio properly over the back two channels. 
The same goes for the uncompressed audio if you look closely at the display on your receiver when these modes are being received you will see the DTS MA logo lit even when you have the THX Ultra Cinema 2 on the main display.


----------



## mgrace47 (Jul 24, 2008)

You are correct about the DTS logo being lit on the display even though THX Ultra Cinema 2 on the main display. That was one of the reasons why I am getting so confused. Does the same hold true for other modes such as Dolby digital EX/DTS ES, etc.? If so, appears that Ultra Cinema 2 is the overall best choice (I like the sound it reproduces very much.) Thanks for the reply.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Yes, That is correct. Ultra Cinema 2 will work for any of the Dolby or DTS modes as well.


----------



## Jeff Aguilar (Apr 11, 2006)

Since most bluray movies only have 5.1, I almost always apply post processing to it. On my receiver, it is ProLogic IIX Movie. If you have a 7.1 setup, you might as well take advantage of it.


----------



## Bailman (Nov 21, 2006)

I agree. When I had my 7.1 configured I used PLIIx also.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

If your receiver does not have THX modes then PLIIx is your next best option. PLIIz looks even more interesting coming out in the new Onkyo Receivers and I assume that others will jump in soon as well adding another dimension to movies with a set of upper front channels that simulate falling or sounds going up.


----------



## Bailman (Nov 21, 2006)

Wow Really? I didn't read up when someone posted about front effects. I have a RX-V1 (that I used to use) with front effects and thought nothing of it. If it adds the dropping and rising as you say. Whoa...look out!


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Bailman said:


> Wow Really? I didn't read up when someone posted about front effects. I have a RX-V1 (that I used to use) with front effects and thought nothing of it. If it adds the dropping and rising as you say. Whoa...look out!


It wont, This is a brand new mode only available on Onkyo receivers at this point but soon should be out for the rest.
The mode your Yamaha has is not the same as amatter of fact it turns off when using most to the Dolby or DTS modes.


----------



## Bailman (Nov 21, 2006)

My bad for the poorly worded post. I was saying that I didn't realize the new front format being discussed would incorporate technology that mimic swooping and rising effects. This happened b/c when these front effects were mentioned I was like, big deal....my Old yammy has this and read no further.

But thanks for reminding me that I have trouble forming sentences.:T

This new format will be great.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

There is a good description of this new Dolby IIz mode here at Home Theater review.


----------



## Bailman (Nov 21, 2006)

http://www.dolby.com/consumer/technology/prologic-IIz.html

It looks like Yamaha had similar technology after all. And yes it could be used on top of a DTS or Dolby Digital soundtrack as todays THX choices may also be used. It was simply named "Enhanced". My excitement is greatly lessened now. This is simply ambient sounds like Yamaha had on the RX-V1 and possibly other models. I was excited when my misunderstanding led me to believe this "new" technology would be very similar to the current surround sound technology of dedicated processing. All that this "new" technology will do is widen and raise the sound stage. It will not simulate falling and raising effects. :yawn:

When someone incorporates dedicated channels for falling and raising effects like we currently have with flyby's or a drive-by's using rear to front and/or left to right that will be the bomb. I say it could be seen in our lifetime. :jump:


----------



## eaglerider94 (Mar 19, 2008)

Great Tony! I too have been confused with all of the different options, in fact it drives my wife nuts when I set up movies to watch. She now jokingly tells me to go get all of your settings done:reading: before we begin to watch a movie. On the one had I don't blame her but on the other hand I have this obsession with trying to customize everything I own. Sick huh?


----------



## Candoo (Mar 19, 2009)

on the subject of optical mediums used for audio transmission...
there are two good reaosns a typical TOS based optical connection can not carry the need data for multichannel uncompressed audio...

let me start by saying this. it irritates me somewhat that all too offen people take a buzzword such as fibre optic and apply a very general and extremely broad definition and concept of oepration to all it's standards and implimentations. in truth a sergical tubing a flashlight and a photostrobe/photovaltaic materical can be called fibreoptics in avery llose sense.

the protocal for TOS over fibre optic materical does not provide the bandwidth needed too carry uncompressed digital autio. the specification was set forth long before any uncompressed formats where made aviable to any consumers. outsid of AFF and WAV formats.

Second, the light used to send tos signals or any fibre optic based transmisisons greatly determins the amount of data that can be sent. 

at anyrate. i'v attempting to supply information based on my limited knolege of the subject and it's implimentations. I am in no way responding based on having freshly read the standards from quoting from memory.

So if i'm wrong, please correct me. But please include proof.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

Tim, your basically correct in what you say. Put simply optical is unable to handle the added bandwidth needed for the uncompressed audio The thing is that coaxial can handle the bandwidth so I do still believe that its also a copy write issue that someone decided to enforce upon us so we would be forced to use HDMI.


----------



## Candoo (Mar 19, 2009)

tonyvdb, i agree completely withyoru accessment. the issues bieng pretty simple. if the companies pioneering these technologies don't push people into new standards then they don't continue to thrive and grow.

if optical or coaxual technologies where the end all of connecitons for digital multi channel audio. then HDMI would have never cought on. with with the concerns over piracy and HDMI's added security and copy protection measures. it insure thoes companies can and will continue to sell products.

forcing cunsumers into new formats and technologies is what drives th HT biz....

do i agree with it????? no entirely.

however i see clearly it's function.


----------



## eaglerider94 (Mar 19, 2008)

I have my DVD player connected to my Denon 3808CI via the optical out. Are you saying that I need to run the coaxial out in order to gain the benefits of dts digital surround for movies? Can I run both optical and coaxial and let the Denon decide?


----------



## Candoo (Mar 19, 2009)

NO NO. DTS and Dolby Digital where designed to operate over the bandwidth of coaxual tox or optical fibre.

it's when you get to uncompressed multi channel audio that TOS fails.

however some equipment allow uncomrpessed TOS linke for stereo uncompressed signals.

however while i have read them to be read aobut some TOS supporting uncompressed stereo tracks... i can not confirm this via personal expereince.


----------



## the_rookie (Sep 30, 2008)

No, no rick. we are talking about the High Definition sound. It isnt capable of carrying Dolby HD or DTS Master Audio.

Optical out carries Dolby Digital, Dolby Digital Plus, and DTS just fine.


----------



## eaglerider94 (Mar 19, 2008)

I see, as in SACD's. I'll leave my optical output alone then. BTW, I've yet to listen to a SACD on my system or any other for that matter. 
What online outlet carries them? Does Amazon carry them?


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

eaglerider94 said:


> What online outlet carries them? Does Amazon carry them?


Yes, Ive seen them on Amazon. I have also seen them on the rare occasion at our local HMV music store and Ive seen them at Best buy.


----------



## keelay (Dec 11, 2008)

Hopefully I can put this all together for you. This is my understanding. 

FOR Optical or Coaxial both are part of a digital transport standard known as S/PDIF. This standard, as has been mentioned includes, both a physical layer and a link layer - If I can use network terminology. The physical layer is medium to sending the digital data. This is where electrons or photons carry the information across some kind of cable. Coaxial and Optical are both physical layer attributes. The "Link" layer is the protocol layer this is where the little bursts of light or voltage get translated into 1's and 0's. The chips(from various manufacturers) handling this translation were designed with the S/PDIF spec in mind which had a specific data rate for the standard. The standard was developed a long time ago when chip speed and cost were not what they are today - also the data rates needed then were very low. The data rate limitation of S/PDIF has it's root in the standard and affects the capability of the chip decoders in most of receivers of the last two decades. The physical layers (opt and coax) are potentially capable of much higher bandwidths but without a new standard no one is going to make a chip to try to push to the receiver mfrs and most importantly there wasn't a need for a higher data rate until now. 

Along came HD audio content. Blu Ray and HD DVD both had high data rates. This is where the copyright issues come in. The movie industry(MPAA) and audio industry(RIAA) both have significant interest in protecting their Intellectual Property. Sony is a big player in both along with electronics and standards in general. In entertaining how to handle HD content they were already looking at a new video stand which did have copy protection built in (HDCP). It made much more business sense to build the newly needed audio standard into the copy protected scheme. It also simplified connections for consumers (well hopefully in the long run) One cable for all your hookups. Lossless and completely protected everyone wins they thought. Remember that Sony was one of the original developers of S/PDIF (Sony/Phillips) and likely could had pushed a different standard. 

So basically:
S/PDIF cannot carry HD audio because of a speed limitation. The speed limitation is in the decoders not the cables. Instead of implementing a faster S/PDIF standard the big companies added an HD audio capability to HDMI. HDMI can provide copyright protections (through HDCP) if the content provider wishes to use it.


----------

