# Peterman's Atmos Build Thread



## Peter Loeser

Well I've decided to give Atmos a try in my HT. For reference, here is my existing HT thread in the finished rooms forum. It's never really "finished" though is it... I have used various combinations of Dolbly PLIIz including front height and front wide channels, and so far I've been happy with the results. I like the idea of Atmos, and I have the space/freedom to add more speakers to my HT. I'm still in the planning phase, but I thought I'd share it here for your information and feedback. I'm also in the process of improving my room's acoustic properties as you can see here, so these will be parallel projects.

A few details about my current room/arrangement
Dimensions are 16'3" L x 14'10" W x 9'10" H
Volume: ~ 2300cuft (accounting for partially slanted wall on two sides)
Current display: 60" Plasma (possibly to be upgraded to 120"-ish projector once 4k prices come down)
Distance to front row is ~ 10ft
Distance to back row is ~ 14.5ft
My HT is completely enclosed and it's only purpose is HT, making it a pretty idea space for an Atmos system. Some might argue it's too small... I guess I will find out.

My proposed Atmos design
Since I already have speakers in the "wide" positions, I'd like to have the capability for the Atmos 9.1.2 configuration. However, the idea of 4 height channels is appealing too (i.e. 7.1.4). So, I've decided to install 6 in-ceiling speakers, for a couple reasons. First, it would allow me to run any of the current Atmos configurations (yes, switching between x.1.2 and x.1.4 would require me to swap speaker wires at the back of the AVR). Assuming the AVRs continue to scale up Atmos for HT use, it is conceivable that 9.1.4 or higher will eventually be available as well. Finally, as a product reviewer, it would give me the ability to test the full range of upcoming Atmos AVRs for my HTS reviews.

Although I would like good audio performance for both rows of seating, the vast majority of the time my HT is being used, I'm the only one in there and I'll be seated in the middle of the front row. For that reason, I'm focusing on optimal performance for the front row, even if it means some sacrifices made by the back row. With that in mind, I have updated the setup diagrams from Dolby's Atmos guide to show my actual dimensions for the front row. The proportions are a bit off as my room is closer to a square than a long rectangle as show, but you get the idea. The dimensions shown in blue are Dobly's recommendations, and the dimensions in black are my actual (planned) dimensions.





Some general thoughts
There has been some question about dispersion angle specs on typical in-ceiling HT speakers and their ability to meet Dolby's 90º recommendation. This is certainly a concern and potential issue. One possible solution is to use in-ceiling speakers with pivoting tweeters, so they can be aimed at the main listening position. This should help to a certain degree (eh? eh?), but rooms with multiple rows of seating may still have to live with less than idea performance. I have chosen in-ceiling speakers with pivoting tweeters and plan to aim them toward the middle of the listening area with a heavy bias toward the front row, since that's where my MLP is. I have requested the dispersion spec from the manufacturer and I'm still waiting for a response at the time of this post. Of course, I will do some testing/trial and error, before finalizing the tweeter position and installing the grilles.

On a related note, while the figures above make my speaker arrangement look quite ideal based on the Dolby recommendations, things get a bit hairy when I consider my 2nd row of seating. As stated, I am less concerned about optimal performance in that row, but certainly want to make it work as good as the first row if possible. My seating positions are somewhat flexible, though I plan to build a riser for the 2nd row soon, which will make things more permanent. I still have some tweaking to do (and even created a 2D CAD model to move things around and see how it affects speaker angles and distances). 

Another topic for debate is that adding more speakers is no guarantee that the surround experience will improve. I totally agree, but I also believe that a properly installed and calibrated Atmos system has huge potential over a basic 5.1 system. That's not to say that a properly setup 5.1 system can't be immensely satisfying.

Atmos vs non-Atmos recordings... Some are comparing Dolby PLIIz to Atmos and making the assumption that Atmos will just be using ambient sounds to create more non-discrete channels (such as height or wide). While this is somewhat accurate concerning non-Atmos recordings it will not be the case with Atmos-enabled soundtracks containing sound objects with meta-data (someone correct me if I'm wrong). These objects are individual sounds engineered to move through the room in three dimensions. Atmos processes those according to your setup (5.1.4, 7.1.2, etc) and determines which speakers to send the signals to. On non-Atmos recordings, the effect will certainly be less-precise with more guess-work being done by the processor. What I'm saying is, if someone were to invest in an elaborate Atmos system and continue to use non-Atmos recordings, the perceivable improvement may be disappointing.

You may be wondering which AVR I have chosen. The answer is, I haven't. I plan to audition/review the high end Atmos models from Pioneer, Yamaha, Onkyo, and Denon over the next few months, while I finalize positioning and installation of Atmos speakers, and hopefully finish my acoustic treatments. I haven't determined a receiver budget at this point, but hopefully I'll get a better idea of what features I need once I [hopefully] get my hands on a few of the new/upcoming models.

I will use this thread to post and discuss any changes or updates to my plan, add progress updates and photos as I begin the installation process. I would love to hear about others' Atmos builds and I always welcome constructive feedback and/or suggestions.


----------



## NBPk402

:foottap: Subscribed... I too would like to convert to Atmos. I hope to be able to do it in 2015. I'll let you be the tester so I can see how it is done correctly, before i do anything (plus I still have to finish up what I started). :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

Happy to be the Guniea pig Ron. I enjoy the tinkering aspect of trying something new. Hopefully I can be a helpful resource for others making the jump to Atmos. At the very least, learn from my fail... :dontknow:

edit:


ellisr63 said:


> (plus I still have to finish up what I started). :T


Good idea! I'm not that smart...


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> Happy to be the Guniea pig Ron. I enjoy the tinkering aspect of trying something new. Hopefully I can be a helpful resource for others making the jump to Atmos. At the very least, learn from my fail... :dontknow:
> 
> edit:
> Good idea! I'm not that smart...


:T:T


----------



## bkeeler10

Subscribed as well.

While it seems obvious that native Atmos soundtracks are going to benefit greatly, there are many great reports out there about the effectiveness of the new upmixer that comes with all Atmos receivers/prepros. It is called Dolby Surround, and many people reporting on the AVS thread (over 10k posts in 3 months ) are very impressed with it when upmixing non-Atmos content.

I hope to set up Atmos soon in my theater as well. I have some stuff to sell first, which is not happening very quickly unfortunately. Once I do, though, I will immediately jump into Atmos with both feet.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Subscribed as well.
> 
> While it seems obvious that native Atmos soundtracks are going to benefit greatly, there are many great reports out there about the effectiveness of the new upmixer that comes with all Atmos receivers/prepros. It is called Dolby Surround, and many people reporting on the AVS thread (over 10k posts in 3 months ) are very impressed with it when upmixing non-Atmos content.


Thanks for pointing that out. And in case it sounded like I was dogging PLIIz that wasn't my intention. I almost always enjoy the height or wide effects generated while watching movies. I suspect that as it has been stated, the Atmos upmixer will also do quite well with non-Atmos content - even basic 5-channel and 2-channel recordings. While Atmos recordings should give the best performance on an Atmos system, it doesn't mean you'll need to throw out all of your non-Atmos Blu-rays and start over.




bkeeler10 said:


> I hope to set up Atmos soon in my theater as well. I have some stuff to sell first, which is not happening very quickly unfortunately. Once I do, though, I will immediately jump into Atmos with both feet.


I'm in a similar boat. Lots of ideas for my HT, not lots of money to spend on it. Many of my upgrades so far have been funded by selling older gear.


----------



## Wardsweb

That looks awesome Peter. What receivers are you considering?


----------



## Peter Loeser

Thanks Luther. Since I want to be able to do 7.1.4 and 9.1.2 I'll need something capable of processing 11 channels. That limits me to the following (in no particular order):

Denon AVR X5200 (Sonnie just upgraded to this one)
Yamaha RX-A3040
Onkyo TX NR3030 (not available yet)
Pioneer Elite SC-85/87/89 (not 100% sure if these can do 11 channels)

There may be others available now or in the works - these are just a few I've considered so far based on specs.

Edit: The Pioneer Elites can process a maximum of 9 channels.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Something I forgot to mention in my original post was the height of what Dolby calls the 'listener level" speakers. In my case, these are all the ones not in the ceiling. Per the Atmos guidelines, they need to be close to the height of the seated listener's ears. In fact, this doesn't necessarily apply only to Atmos, is worth considering if you already have surround speakers installed above ear level. Mine happen to be roughly 18 inches above seated ear level. I did this partially to keep them somewhat out of the way, and partially to avoid localization since they are direct-radiating speakers and they are close to some seating positions. I will probably try to do some testing with my "listener level" speakers moved down to ear level to see if it sounds ok with the Atmos setup. If so, I'll permanently relocate them. It won't be a huge move, but it will allow for more separation across the height of the room.

Also, minor correction - I mentioned front wide channels as if they were part of Dolby PLIIz, but in fact they are part of DTS NEO:X. Dolby PLIIz offers only the front height channels. Just want to avoid confusion there. I believe Audyssey DSX can do front wides as well.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> Something I forgot to mention in my original post was the height of what Dolby calls the 'listener level" speakers. In my case, these are all the ones not in the ceiling. Per the Atmos guidelines, they need to be close to the height of the seated listener's ears. In fact, this doesn't necessarily apply only to Atmos, is worth considering if you already have surround speakers installed above ear level. Mine happen to be roughly 18 inches above seated ear level. I did this partially to keep them somewhat out of the way, and partially to avoid localization since they are direct-radiating speakers and they are close to some seating positions. I will probably try to do some testing with my "listener level" speakers moved down to ear level to see if it sounds ok with the Atmos setup. If so, I'll permanently relocate them. It won't be a huge move, but it will allow for more separation across the height of the room.
> 
> Also, minor correction - I mentioned front wide channels as if they were part of Dolby PLIIz, but in fact they are part of DTS NEO:X. Dolby PLIIz offers only the front height channels. Just want to avoid confusion there. I believe Audyssey DSX can do front wides as well.


On my setup... I ended up with the woofers of my rear surrounds just above my 2nd row seating. I have the woofers of my 1st row seating at ear level, along with my front 3 channels. I don't know how I could have them all at ear level when my 2nd row is elevated.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> On my setup... I ended up with the woofers of my rear surrounds just above my 2nd row seating. I have the woofers of my 1st row seating at ear level, along with my front 3 channels. I don't know how I could have them all at ear level when my 2nd row is elevated.


I will have to do something very similar as my 2nd row will be 10-12 inches higher than the first. Most likely, my front surrounds (#5 in the diagram) will be at ear level (same as my mains), my rear surrounds (#7 in the diagram) will be elevated 10-12 inches above the mains to account for the riser, and I may split the difference and put the side surrounds (#6 in the diagram) about 5-6 inches above the mains. Although I have my surrounds wall-mounted and I don't expect to change my furniture, I still have some flexibility with seating positions and don't mind relocating my surround speakers. I will start by putting things as close as I can get them to the recommended locations and then find the best combination of performance, convenience, and aesthetics. In my opinion, having the rear surrounds 12 inches above ear level will have very little impact on the overall performance. They will still be MUCH closer to ear level (front row) than the in-ceiling speakers and right at ear level for the 2nd row.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Some basic CAD sketches have proven that it will be impossible for both rows of seating to fall within the recommended angle specs in the Atmos guide (see first post). So I have a few options. 

1. Proceed as planned with the front row being right in the sweet spot and don't care about the back row. 

2. Place the speakers so the front row is at one extreme (still within spec) bringing the back row closer to being in spec (but still outside the spec) 

3. Place thee speaker between, putting both rows out of spec by about the same amount. Currently I'm leaning toward a combination of 1 and 2. Put the front row well within spec but with a slight bias toward the back row. To be honest, the more I get into this the less it makes sense to me to do any more than x.x.2 in a home theater unless you only have one seat or one row. Again, I'm usually the only one critically watching movies in my HT, so I don't mind setting up my system with a heavy bias toward a single seat. I have also read that Atmos is pretty robust in the sense that speaker/seating placement isn't super critical. It seems to be part of the reason the Atmos-enabled (reflecting) speakers work so well.

Edit: I should clarify that I'm only talking about the in-ceiling speakers in this post, as I have not yet installed them. My listener level speaker locations are all pretty much finalized.


----------



## phillihp23

I'll be watching and interested in your findings. I'm interested in possibly in a few years trying a 9.4.4 atmos setup. Basically add 4 ceilings (remove front heights) to my 9.4 system with wides. Peter i'm interested in what ceiling speakers you decide to use and your opinion once tested.


----------



## Peter Loeser

phillihp23 said:


> I'll be watching and interested in your findings. I'm interested in possibly in a few years trying a 9.4.4 atmos setup. Basically add 4 ceilings (remove front heights) to my 9.4 system with wides. Peter i'm interested in what ceiling speakers you decide to use and your opinion once tested.


Same here. Currently the max I've seen in a consumer A/V processor/receiver is 7.1.4 or 9.1.2. Like you though, I expect that max to increase over time, so I plan to be prepped for up to 9.1.6 (which also allows me to run any x.x.2 or x.x.4 configuration). I have already purchased in-ceiling speakers from HTD (MP-R80). They are very reasonably priced and have a pivoting tweeter. I'm hoping to finalize locations and install them later this month or early next month.


----------



## htinstallnj

Im in the middle of building out my living room which is where we will do the majority of our movies/gaming. I am almost ready for the prewiring and am not quite sure what to do. I have a similar size room to what you have (16' x 13' x 9' ceiling). I have two problems that I can see as of right now. I am sitting with my back against the wall that is 13' facing a 75" television, which puts me about 12' back, right against a wall.

I was thinking about going with a 5.2.2 setup but was trying to figure out if it will work with a 7.2.2 setup somehow even with the open area to the left of my seating arrangement (I don't want to use any speaker stands). I would think for my room that 4 ceiling speakers may be too much, but I really have no idea and am not opposed to it.

I run a small home theater install business and have yet to wire anything for atmos. I honestly am still a little unclear about it and if it will work with my seating arrangement. Is it going to be useless due to the setup of my room? I would hate to not wire this correctly while all walls are open.

Thoughts/suggestions are appreciated!

Thanks!


----------



## bkeeler10

Have you seen this image?










If you're up against the back wall, you probably don't want to attempt to do more than a 5.2.2 layout (or 5.1.2 to be more accurate), using the top middle designation for the ceiling speakers, putting them slightly ahead of your listening position (say, at 75-80 degrees or so).

However, I would expect a substantial improvement going from a standard 5.1 system to a 5.1.2 system. Definitely worth it, based on the numerous people reporting their impressions elsewhere.


----------



## bkeeler10

Okay, change of mind here. You could easily do a 5.1.4 layout using the top middle just behind your position (right at the wall, about 95 degrees) and the front height position (at 30-45 degrees). One guy over at AVS has done just that with his room, and he is at the back wall too, and he has reported very favorable results. So I would wire for that. I would not, however, worry about trying 7.1.2 or 7.1.4 in this layout.

Edit: The same guy over at AVS recently moved his top middle speakers slightly forward of his listening position (at about 85 degrees) and slightly prefers that. So you have some flexibility.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Okay, change of mind here. You could easily do a 5.1.4 layout using the top middle just behind your position (right at the wall, about 95 degrees) and the front height position (at 30-45 degrees). One guy over at AVS has done just that with his room, and he is at the back wall too, and he has reported very favorable results. So I would wire for that. I would not, however, worry about trying 7.1.2 or 7.1.4 in this layout.
> 
> Edit: The same guy over at AVS recently moved his top middle speakers slightly forward of his listening position (at about 85 degrees) and slightly prefers that. So you have some flexibility.


I pretty much agree here. Based on David's room size, 7.1.4 is doable, but based on his seating location, I think anything above 5.1.2 or 5.1.4 will provide diminishing returns. For a x.1.4 Atmos setup, the minimum recommended angle for the 2nd row of heights is 125 degrees, which would be basically impossible for seating against the back row. My personal recommendation in this case would be 5.1.2.

Edit: actually my first recommendation would be to move the couch off the wall and maybe do 5.1.4. If it's not possible to move the couch then 5.1.2.


----------



## bkeeler10

At least in the case of the Denon AVRs, any combination of two pairs of overhead speakers is acceptable, as long as they are not adjacent positions. For example, referring to the diagram I posted (which is a Denon diagram btw), you can do top front and top rear, or front height and top middle, but not top front and top middle, or top rear and rear height.

The guy over at AVS has heard several Dolby Atmos installations, and is really happy with his 5.1.4 setup (with top middle at 85 degrees and front height at 42 degrees IIRC). While you may wish to start out with 5.1.2, I would at least also run wire for that front height location as well.

If it were me, I would do 5.1.4 as described. I think going from 5.1.4 to 7.1.4 would not make a big difference, but going from 5.1.2 to 5.1.4 will. 

Edit: Keep in mind that it's the angle of the speaker position relative to listener ear level that matters. Front height will not necessarily be at the wall-ceiling corner, as is shown in the diagram. The angle is what matters.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> At least in the case of the Denon AVRs, any combination of two pairs of overhead speakers is acceptable, as long as they are not adjacent positions. For example, referring to the diagram I posted (which is a Denon diagram btw), you can do top front and top rear, or front height and top middle, but not top front and top middle, or top rear and rear height. The guy over at AVS has heard several Dolby Atmos installations, and is really happy with his 5.1.4 setup (with top middle at 85 degrees and front height at 42 degrees IIRC). While you may wish to start out with 5.1.2, I would at least also run wire for that front height location as well. If it were me, I would do 5.1.4 as described. I think going from 5.1.4 to 7.1.4 would not make a big difference, but going from 5.1.2 to 5.1.4 will.


I have not seen the Denon diagram. Are they from a manual which can be downloaded online? I have only looked at the Dolby spec, but it would definitely be helpful to see how manufacturers are implementing it.


----------



## bkeeler10

Yes, this particular diagram can be found in the manuals for the Denon Atmos AVRs. Follow this link, for example, to the AVR-X5200W page, and click downloads for the manual. Refer to page 31.


----------



## Peter Loeser

These are the Atmos configurations from the Denon manual.

9-Channel (7.1.2)
 

11-Channel (7.1.4)
 


It sounds like the AVS member is using a 4 ceiling speaker arrangement, but with the rear speakers in the middle position. I guess it could work. I've read that Atmos is pretty flexible with respect to seating and speaker locations. I'm glad to hear the feedback has generally been positive regarding Atmos home theater installations. I'm looking forward to getting mine up and running.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Since we're on the topic, I got curious about the available Atmos configs on some of the other current AVRs. Here are the diagrams from the Pioneer Elite receivers.

The SC-85, SC-87 and SC-89 are capable of processing 9 channels, even though some of the diagrams seem to suggest more.

7.1 + Front Height *OR* 7.1.2 Atmos.
For this speaker configuration, the front height and top middle speakers can't be used simultaneously.
 

7.1 + Front Wide *OR* 7.1.2 Atmos
For this speaker configuration, the front wide and top middle speakers can't be used simultaneously.
 

5.1.4 Atmos (5.1 + 4 Atmos ceiling speakers)
For this speaker configuration all 9 speakers would be used simultaneously.


While these models can only process 9 channels, they actually have 11 sets of speaker terminals. One thing I like about the Pioneers is that you can wire you speakers for more than one configuration, and the AVR will activate and de-activate certain speakers depending on which output configuration you want to use at the time. Let's say for multi-channel music you prefer a setup with front wides, but for movies you prefer Atmos height channels. You can wire both and switch between the two without having to rearrange wires/speakers. The same goes for the lower Elite models, but they process a maximum of 7 channels.


----------



## bkeeler10

The Denons will also allow you to connect 13 speakers even though they can only process 9 or 11. This for the same reason as the Pioneers I believe.

You'll notice on the Denons diagram I posted that there is a lot of overlap between front height and top front. You can be within spec for both. Since the guy on AVS wanted two sets of overheads, but couldn't meet the spec for top rear, and since the Denon does not allow for top middle and top front, this is why he went with top middle and front height. Again it seems to work very well for him.


----------



## bkeeler10

Oh and even though the Denon doesn't officially list front height + top middle as an Atmos configuration, it is allowed and the receiver will decode Atmos using it.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> The Denons will also allow you to connect 13 speakers even though they can only process 9 or 11. This for the same reason as the Pioneers I believe.


I assumed that was the case. It's a handy feature IMO.



bkeeler10 said:


> You'll notice on the Denons diagram I posted that there is a lot of overlap between front height and top front. You can be within spec for both. Since the guy on AVS wanted two sets of overheads, but couldn't meet the spec for top rear, and since the Denon does not allow for top middle and top front, this is why he went with top middle and front height. Again it seems to work very well for him.


I misunderstood initially. That makes perfect sense.




bkeeler10 said:


> Oh and even though the Denon doesn't officially list front height + top middle as an Atmos configuration, it is allowed and the receiver will decode Atmos using it.


I noticed that diagram looks like a hybrid of PLIIz and Atmos. Nice to know the two can be combined for Atmos playback. With all of the different Dolby configurations available now (at least on Atmos-enabled AVRs) DTS Neo:X and Audyssey DSX seem unnecessary, or at least redundant.


----------



## Owen Bartley

Great thread Peter, I'm very interested to see what you end up with. I am intrigued by Atmos and it's cool to see how people implement it differently, but with results that they seem to enjoy.


----------



## htinstallnj

Thanks for all the info guys! I should be ready to prewire within the next few weeks or so and will post some pics along the way. I am wondering now about the subwoofer placement. Optimal spot with my setup would be two in the rear (one on each side of the seating). I don't really have room for any in the front however I can possibly do one in the front inside my A/V closet (see attached pic). 

The closet will have shelving starting about 30" off the floor. I can leave the space at the bottom floor open completely with all components above on shelving. Closet is approx 20" x 22" x 96" 

Thoughts!?


----------



## Peter Loeser

htinstallnj said:


> Thanks for all the info guys! I should be ready to prewire within the next few weeks or so and will post some pics along the way. I am wondering now about the subwoofer placement. Optimal spot with my setup would be two in the rear (one on each side of the seating). I don't really have room for any in the front however I can possibly do one in the front inside my A/V closet (see attached pic).
> 
> The closet will have shelving starting about 30" off the floor. I can leave the space at the bottom floor open completely with all components above on shelving. Closet is approx 20" x 22" x 96"
> 
> Thoughts!?


Do you already have your sub(s) on hand? Best bet would be to try a few different spots to see what sounds best since every room behaves differently. Of the two options you're considering, I would lean toward two subs on either end of your seating. Putting one in your closet might add some undesired boominess to the bass response.


----------



## htinstallnj

Peter Loeser said:


> Do you already have your sub(s) on hand? Best bet would be to try a few different spots to see what sounds best since every room behaves differently. Of the two options you're considering, I would lean toward two subs on either end of your seating. Putting one in your closet might add some undesired boominess to the bass response.


That's what I figured. I have one sub now but I am probably going to purchase two new ones. I want everything to be new for this setup. Currently have an AVRx4000 which I'll be upgrading for an atmos capable receiver. I won't really be able to test the setup if I am prewiring now because everything is open, unless I just run lines for a sub in all four corners and test them out when it's sheetrocked.


----------



## Peter Loeser

htinstallnj said:


> ...unless I just run lines for a sub in all four corners and test them out when it's sheetrocked.


Not a bad idea IMO.


----------



## Savjac

I have to follow this thread, its so interesting and informative. I already have all the speakers and subs, I just need the new Denon to make it work.....oh and install the remaining speakers.
So i am watching closely to see how its done. 

Thanks Peter


----------



## Peter Loeser

Thanks everyone for your interest in the project. I'm jumping back and forth between the Atmos upgrade, acoustic treatment upgrades, and HTS reviews. I think I've decided on placement for the Atmos ceiling speakers. My plan is to put them within the spec for the front row, even though that will put them out of spec for the back row. I'll put them toward the back of the range for the front row so they'll at least be in the ballpark for the back row. Again, this is based on the fact that the majority of the time my HT gets used it's just one or two of us in the front row, and what I've heard/read that Atmos works pretty well even with less than ideal speaker placement. I hope to get the speakers installed in the next couple weeks when I have some free time. I'm also hoping to get my hands on Atmos-enabled Yamaha and Pioneer receivers to review in the next few months.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I'm starting to try to track down available media with Atmos soundtracks. So far there is just the one Blu-Ray available which is Transformers 4. A few others have been announced for Nov-Dec release. I suspect there are some Dolby demo discs floating around too, if one has the proper connections. Like any other new AV tech, early adopters won't have much content to choose from. Anybody know of any other Atmos content available now?


----------



## phillihp23

Peter Loeser said:


> I'm starting to try to track down available media with Atmos soundtracks. So far there is just the one Blu-Ray available which is Transformers 4. A few others have been announced for Nov-Dec release. I suspect there are some Dolby demo discs floating around too, if one has the proper connections. Like any other new AV tech, early adopters won't have much content to choose from. Anybody know of any other Atmos content available now?


Dolby has announced three additional titles that will carry an Atmos soundtrack: Paramount Pictures' Hercules (November 4th release) and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (December 16th release), along with Lionsgate's Step Up All In (November 4th release).

And also this fall sometime content service provider VUDU, the first streaming service to announce support for Dolby Atmos films.


----------



## selden

Some Dolby Atmos demo trailers are available for downloading in the Dolby section of http://www.demo-world.eu/trailers/high-definition-trailers.php

Be sure to download the lossless versions. The lossy DD5.1 versions don't contain the Atmos metadata.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Thanks for the tips



phillihp23 said:


> Dolby has announced three additional titles that will carry an Atmos soundtrack: Paramount Pictures' Hercules (November 4th release) and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (December 16th release), along with Lionsgate's Step Up All In (November 4th release).
> 
> And also this fall sometime content service provider VUDU, the first streaming service to announce support for Dolby Atmos films.


I had seen those announced as well. TMNT was ok, might be worth trying with Atmos. I use VUDU occasionally, I will have to look into that a bit more.




selden said:


> Some Dolby Atmos demo trailers are available for downloading in the Dolby section of http://www.demo-world.eu/trailers/high-definition-trailers.php
> 
> Be sure to download the lossless versions. The lossy DD5.1 versions don't contain the Atmos metadata.


I will check these out tonight. I'm not familiar with that website. Are the clips... shall we say... legally acquired?


----------



## Peter Loeser

Quick update - I had a chance to mount 4 of the 6 ceiling speakers before a commitment I had this evening. Hope to get the last two up tomorrow. My wire comes Tuesday so it may not be till next weekend that I get them all hooked up. Here are some photos just for fun.

Above the HT. Nice easy access but lots of itchy. There are two layers of blown insulation, one red, one white. In case you were wondering what/who was murdered up there.
 

Mounted speaker from above. Yes, it's off-center in the hole. I will fine-tune mounting positions when I run the wiring. Today's task was mostly to get the holes measured and cut. I will create a little pocket above each speaker using kraft-faced insulation and then cover it all back up with the loose insulation. This will prevent the loose insulation from piling up in the back of the speaker, and give them some breathing room. This was recommended by HTD.com support. I'll try to post some pictures of that part as I do it.
 

Looking toward the back of the room - this is the middle set.
 

Looking toward the front of the room - middle set (closer) and front set (farther). The picture makes it look skewed but they are aligned with my mains (45" in from the side walls).


----------



## NBPk402

Looks Great!! You are so lucky having an attic over your HT! We have our MB over ours.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Yeah that has definitely made certain aspects of updating my HT much easier than they could have been. I've been waiting for a cool weekend to go up there and this was it.


----------



## Horrorfan33

Looks Great!!!


----------



## NBPk402

I am surprised with the attic that you didn't go with some IB subs.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> I am surprised with the attic that you didn't go with some IB subs.


I've considered it, but to be honest I've avoided DIY speakers and subs mostly because I haven't felt like committing the time to really learn the theory and do it right. If the dual PSA XS30se's meet my expectations I think I'll be pretty well set in the sub department.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> I've considered it, but to be honest I've avoided DIY speakers and subs mostly because I haven't felt like committing the time to really learn the theory and do it right. If the dual PSA XS30se's meet my expectations I think I'll be pretty well set in the sub department.


If the PSAs are anything like the Triax was... Get ready to start repairing drywall and floor cracks. :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> If the PSAs are anything like the Triax was... Get ready to start repairing drywall and floor cracks. :T


Yeah, that Triax looks like an absolute beast. Dual subs offer huge benefits over a single in my room, so a pair of the XS30 was a bit more economical. Tom has projected some pretty outstanding performance for my room though so at least maybe I'll have a smile on my face while patching the walls.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> Yeah, that Triax looks like an absolute beast. Dual subs offer huge benefits over a single in my room, so a pair of the XS30 was a bit more economical. Tom has projected some pretty outstanding performance for my room though so at least maybe I'll have a smile on my face while patching the walls.


A single Triax in our family room separated the hardwood flooring from the wall, about 2 foot long.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> A single Triax in our family room separated the hardwood flooring from the wall, about 2 foot long.


Wow! People joke about structural damage but but the Triax ain't no joke!


----------



## Peter Loeser

One more update - the dirty work is done and all 6 speakers are mounted. I ran into some minor issues with placement of the rear set, so they ended up on the slanted section of the back wall and spaced slightly closer together than the other two sets. Overall I decided to pretty much optimize the locations for the front row/main listening position and hope for the best in terms of performance for the 2nd row. I'm expecting a Yamaha RX-A3040 for review to arrive tomorrow and my speaker wire from Monoprice to arrive on Tuesday. Hopefully I'll be up and running with Atmos in the next week or two. I'm glad to have the speakers at least mounted. Here's a picture of them all (looking toward the back of the room).

They are symmetric left to right, but only one side of the room and the back wall have the partially slanted section near the ceiling, so it makes them look off-center. I may eventually pay a contractor to add an angled section to the other side wall at some point just for aesthetics. One less corner might help with bass response too. In the meantime, I think I'm going to paint the ceiling to match the walls. Haven't decided yet whether I'll paint the ceiling speakers to match. I'm thinking I'll leave at least the grills as they are.


----------



## bkeeler10

Lookin good. Is the firmware update already available for Atmos to run on the 3040? Last I heard (a few days ago) it was still not released.

Excited to hear your impressions if it is though!


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Lookin good. Is the firmware update already available for Atmos to run on the 3040? Last I heard (a few days ago) it was still not released.
> 
> Excited to hear your impressions if it is though!


Regarding the firmware update - I was told by my Yamaha contact that it would be available "soon". That was about 2 weeks ago. The firmware on the downloads page for the 3040 says "last updated 7/17/14" so I'm guessing it's still not available.


----------



## Peter Loeser

The RX-A3040 is up and running, and after one firmware update it still appears to be lacking Atmos. I _might_ try to wire my ceiling speakers tonight and be done with that. Apparently the Yamaha can use in-ceiling speakers for the front and/or rear presence speakers as well, so I could at least test them out a bit until the Atmos update is available.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> The RX-A3040 is up and running, and after one firmware update it still appears to be lacking Atmos. I _might_ try to wire my ceiling speakers tonight and be done with that. Apparently the Yamaha can use in-ceiling speakers for the front and/or rear presence speakers as well, so I could at least test them out a bit until the Atmos update is available.


How do you like the Yamaha? I have been thinking of moving from my Denon to either the Marantz or Yamaha... Just waiting to see when a AVP comes out. :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

My initial impression of the Yamaha is very good. I'll go into more detail in the review of course. So far I have only listened to some music at lower levels and played around with some of the different DSP modes (there are lots). I did a manual calibration and it sounds pretty good so far, but I will eventually go through the YPAO process as well for comparison to others I've used.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> My initial impression of the Yamaha is very good. I'll go into more detail in the review of course. So far I have only listened to some music at lower levels and played around with some of the different DSP modes (there are lots). I did a manual calibration and it sounds pretty good so far, but I will eventually go through the YPAO process as well for comparison to others I've used.


Does the Yamaha have the conventional DTS, Dolby settings too? I know they used to have a ton of music settings. I am curious as to how it would sound with horns compared to my Denon as some say the Yamaha is brighter sounding than the Denon is.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> Does the Yamaha have the conventional DTS, Dolby settings too? I know they used to have a ton of music settings. I am curious as to how it would sound with horns compared to my Denon as some say the Yamaha is brighter sounding than the Denon is.


I don't have any horns to test them with but I will soon have both a Yamaha and a Denon on hand :T

If the Denon is like the Marantz I used to have it may be a bit more laid back than others. Aren't you planning to EQ all your channels with MiniDSP?


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> I don't have any horns to test them with but I will soon have both a Yamaha and a Denon on hand :T
> 
> If the Denon is like the Marantz I used to have it may be a bit more laid back than others. Aren't you planning to EQ all your channels with MiniDSP?


Yes... So it isn't a valid concern? :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

Getting there little by little. I ran wire from the speakers down to the AV closet last night, so that's [hopefully] the last of the dirty work. It was really late by the time I finished so I have not yet connected/tested any of them. That and I'm still waiting for the Atmos firmware update from Yamaha.

I'll share a few tips for anyone installing in-wall or in-ceiling speakers in a finished room. Most or all of these may be obvious to you. I also may not be as smart as you. If you have never done it before, plan carefully and you could save yourself from some major mistakes.


Make sure you know exactly were the studs are before you cut any holes in your wall/ceiling. I did this and it prevented some serious headaches since I ended up having to relocate all but two of the speakers before cutting. Oh, and get one of those little drywall saws. They're cheap and make quick work of cutting holes.

Trace the template onto your wall with a pencil at all of your planned locations. Placement should be determined for best performance at the listening position, but there is certainly nothing wrong with factoring aesthetics into the equation. Having the outlines all traced on the wall can help visualize that. It's much easier to erase a pencil mark than patch a hole in the wall if you change your mind.

The speaker should come with a cardboard template for cutting the mounting hole. Mine had perforations at two diameters - one for the hole template and one as a grill protector if you wanted to paint over it without painting the grill. The grill cover template was slightly larger. Even after realizing this and knowing I needed to use the smaller one for the cutout, I used the bigger one like a lame brain and now there is play between the speaker frame and the hole ID. They are more than secure enough still and I don't see any risk of them coming loose, but it was still frustrating. Best part? I didn't realize this until after I had cut all 6 holes..... :wits-end:

Get a wire fishing tape. They are inexpensive and almost essential for doing this in a finished room. There are other methods (I've tried some) but they usually don't work as well.

Make sure you get the correct gauge speaker wire. I got the same 12ga in-wall cable from Monoprice that I have used for the rest of my speakers, only to realize the terminals on the HTD speakers are a little too small for it. It ended up working ok, just not completely ideal. A little frustrating knowing 14ga would have been cheaper to buy and easier to pull...

If you're dealing with any kind of fiberglass insulation it's definitely worth using the proper protective gear. Wear long sleeves and pants if possible, respiratory protection and maybe even eye protection depending on your specific case. Even after being up there multiple times, I am still dumb enough to wear shorts and a t-shirt. It makes for a few itchy days once the project is done. Good respiratory protection is a must. Even if it doesn't seem like you're inhaling the fibers, you are. Your throat and lungs will not like it.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter, when you get your Yamaha setup... Can you let me know how well the voicing feature works? I have heard that you can voice all your speakers to for main channels (which sounds like a great feature). :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> Peter, when you get your Yamaha setup... Can you let me know how well the voicing feature works? I have heard that you can voice all your speakers to for main channels (which sounds like a great feature). :T


My goal is to play with as many of the features as I can. I'll make a mental note to try this one. I haven't even touched YPAO yet.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Yamaha released the Atmos firmware update on 11/6, so I updated the RX-A3040 over the weekend and hooked up four of the six ceiling speakers (front and rear sets). We had a somewhat busy weekend so I only listened for a few minutes, and have not tested with any Atmos content yet. At this point the Yamaha allows using either in-ceiling speakers in the front and rear, or Atmos-enabled speakers front and rear. I'm currently running 5.1.4, and may add rear surrounds (requires external amp) for 7.1.4.

Initial impression using Dolby Surround on non-Atmos content is very good though. I watched portions of BBC's Planet Earth, which adds a lot of environmental sounds in all channels. Scenes in caves, underwater, and in forests sounded especially good in terms of having a large soundstage but without any particular speaker's location sticking out. Background music seems to just float in the air, which is a nice effect. I have not done A/B comparison with ceiling speakers on/off yet.

I have some Atmos content which I'll try this week. I still have not run YPAO either, but I will save that discussion for my review of the Yamaha and keep this thread focused on Atmos.


----------



## Heath Cunningham

Hey guys, 
I have the Yamaha 2020, can this model be updated to run atmos?


----------



## Peter Loeser

Heath Cunningham said:


> Hey guys, I have the Yamaha 2020, can this model be updated to run atmos?


At this time the RX-A2040 and RX-A3040 are Yamaha's only Atmos-capable receivers. Older models won't be updated for Atmos as they don't meet the hardware requirements. Plus that wouldn't be good for sales of the new models.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I got a chance last night to briefly try out the Atmos clips suggested by selden. They are short, but do have some cool surround effects such as rain, echo, wind, 360º panning, very deep bass, etc. I tried to see how well the system pinpointed different elements throughout the room, especially the spaces between the speakers. I also listened for localization of specific speakers, and movement in the vertical direction.

I won't say I was blown away but I was impressed nonetheless. I definitely got the sense of having a sphere of sound around me, and panning of individual objects in all directions was very smooth. I could pick one and follow it around the room with my eyes. Turning my head did not seem to disturb the effect. One demo shows a leaf falling from a tree, and it "whooshes" around your head. The sound followed it around the room and back onto the screen.

The fact that the non-Atmos content sounded great, but the Atmos content left me a tad underwhelmed has me curious. Perhaps the short demos aren't the best test, or maybe I still have some tweaking to do. Next step is to try _Transformers: Age of Extinction_. I suspect it makes pretty dramatic use of Atmos objects. I'm hoping for more of a "wow factor" compared to the Atmos intro/demo clips. I'm working on getting a copy of the full Blu-ray demo disc from Dobly too, but we'll see how that goes. I will also run YPAO to see if it makes any improvements over my manual cal.

Sidenote: I've been running my Studio 100s full range while I wait for my new subs to arrive (which means they're also getting the LFE channel). To this day, over 10 years after I bought them, they still absolutely blow me away with how good they sound. While playing back these Atmos demos they were shaking the room with bass that I couldn't even hear. Needless to say, it put a smile on my face  Props to the Yamaha too, for cranking out some hefty power!


----------



## bkeeler10

Cool, sounds like fun! Wish I was playing with Atmos right now too. If you happen to find a way to get a hold of a copy of the Atmos demo disc from Dolby, let me know. I have had no luck so far, but then again I'm not a press or media guy. I know it can be downloaded, but I currently have no way to get those files on a disc or to my system.


----------



## selden

bkeeler10 said:


> Cool, sounds like fun! Wish I was playing with Atmos right now too. If you happen to find a way to get a hold of a copy of the Atmos demo disc from Dolby, let me know. I have had no luck so far, but then again I'm not a press or media guy. I know it can be downloaded, but I currently have no way to get those files on a disc or to my system.


Many (most?) Blu-ray players can play videos from a USB thumb drive. I played them that way, using my Sony BDP S590. Of course, the navigation is different from the Blu-ray disc's menu system.

A direct HDMI connection from your computer or a DLNA network server (by way of a video player) are other methods to view them. In these latter two cases, you need to make sure your media player software has been updated within the past month for Atmos to work.


----------



## bkeeler10

selden said:


> Many (most?) Blu-ray players can play videos from a USB thumb drive. I played them that way, using my Sony BDP S590. Of course, the navigation is different from the Blu-ray disc's menu system.
> 
> A direct HDMI connection from your computer or a DLNA network server (by way of a video player) are other methods to view them. In these latter two cases, you need to make sure your media player software has been updated within the past month for Atmos to work.


Yeah, my bluray player is ancient and not able to play media from a USB drive.

I do not currently have an Atmos setup. I did try last night to play the files I downloaded through my laptop's HDMI connection using XBMC. I was able to choose the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack, but I got no audio when I did that. I'm wondering if the HDMI board in my computer is not multichannel -- is that possible? I need to play with the XBMC settings some more and see if I have something set up incorrectly (first time using XBMC too). It is my understanding that this should work just like a regular TrueHD soundtrack with a non-Atmos system.

Sorry -- don't mean to derail the thread.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Transformers... _eeesh_... I couldn't watch the whole thing. I had set my expectations low in terms of plot, directing, etc but it was still a letdown, including the audio. Dialog, bass, effects, music, everything was just out of balance and all over the place. I tried listening with Atmos and plain old PLIIx and neither was very good in my opinion. The Atmos decoder didn't seem to offer any major improvement. At that point I just called it a day and listened to 2-channel music the rest of the evening. (and really quite enjoyed it)


----------



## selden

bkeeler10 said:


> Yeah, my bluray player is ancient and not able to play media from a USB drive.
> 
> I do not currently have an Atmos setup. I did try last night to play the files I downloaded through my laptop's HDMI connection using XBMC. I was able to choose the Dolby TrueHD soundtrack, but I got no audio when I did that. I'm wondering if the HDMI board in my computer is not multichannel -- is that possible? I need to play with the XBMC settings some more and see if I have something set up incorrectly (first time using XBMC too). It is my understanding that this should work just like a regular TrueHD soundtrack with a non-Atmos system.
> 
> Sorry -- don't mean to derail the thread.


You need a more recent build of XBMC (now called Kodi). They had to fix a bug in the TrueHD software: the Atmos metadata was confusing it. A similar bug in the ffmpeg library affected most other media players, too, so you need one rebuilt with new libraries within the past month or so.


----------



## bkeeler10

Thanks for that -- this sounds familiar about the metadata confusing the PC-based players, so I may have read about it over in "that other forum"  I have the version of XBMC immediately prior to the Kodi beta, so I will try Kodi and see if that solves the problem.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I'm having doubts about whether I've got this completely right. On top of that, I just came across a *glowing* review of the _Transformers_ Atmos soundtrack on other audio forum. I'm going to revisit this some more. I still have hopes that Atmos can do more than I'm hearing, but so far my jaw isn't dropping. I have another Atmos receiver on hand still, and should have a third soon. I'm going to try some different configurations to see if I get any improvements.


----------



## bkeeler10

I was a little surprised at your impression of the audio on TF4. Every other review I've read says it is very good. Perhaps there is something off in your setup then.

On the other hand, in the couple of Atmos demos I saw at CEDIA that played the clip from the Dolby demo disc, the video looked dead awful and the sound was less than impressive. The video was bad enough that there must have been some other problem, since it would never have made it out the door looking that way. Strange . . .


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> I was a little surprised at your impression of the audio on TF4. Every other review I've read says it is very good. Perhaps there is something off in your setup then.
> 
> On the other hand, in the couple of Atmos demos I saw at CEDIA that played the clip from the Dolby demo disc, the video looked dead awful and the sound was less than impressive. The video was bad enough that there must have been some other problem, since it would never have made it out the door looking that way. Strange . . .


That's why I'm hesitant to draw any conclusions yet. For me, going from PLIIx to PLIIz was a very noticeable change, and an improvement in most cases IMO. I was expecting something similar going from PLIIz to Atmos. Not the case so far. I'm leaning toward thinking something isn't right here. I may have some time to tinker some more tonight.


----------



## Owen Bartley

Peter, I have to admit I was a little relieved when I saw your recent post about something potentially being off. I hope that turns out to be the case and you manage to sort it out. I really want Atmos to be a game changer. OK, at least a significant step forward for sound.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Bear with me.. I may be slow but I'll get it worked out lddude:

Happy to be the test subject so you don't have to!


----------



## selden

Bear in mind that a lot of the effusive compliments for Atmos are coming from people newly experiencing it, including myself. Some of the enthusiasm is just like that generated by any new entertainment format. In some cases the differences are subtle, but they distinctly are improvements, not a degradation of the movie experience. Some people have reported improvements in the horizontal soundstage in addition to the envelopment provided by the overheads.

People who've turned off their ear-level speakers have reported that TF4 makes far less use of the overheads than they were expecting. Obviously the quality of the audio mixing is going to vary from one movie to another. Some directors are much more adept in their use of sound than others.


----------



## Peter Loeser

selden said:


> Bear in mind that a lot of the effusive compliments for Atmos are coming from people newly experiencing it, including myself. Some of the enthusiasm is just like that generated by any new entertainment format. In some cases the differences are subtle, but they distinctly are improvements, not a degradation of the movie experience. Some people have reported improvements in the horizontal soundstage in addition to the envelopment provided by the overheads.
> 
> People who've turned off their ear-level speakers have reported that TF4 makes far less use of the overheads than they were expecting. Obviously the quality of the audio mixing is going to vary from one movie to another. Some directors are much more adept in their use of sound than others.


Good points. I haven't ruled out the possibility that the content (TF4 in this case) is the limiting factor as it's one of the first attempts in this format. I had also considered playing it back with all but the height channels disconnected, but haven't gotten around to it yet. It would be one thing if it was not _as_ good as expected but it was just plain bad. Like I said, stay tuned...


----------



## Peter Loeser

I have revisited my attempt at Atmos a couple times now since my initial somewhat underwhelming experience. I double checked my setup and levels and all looks good. In the process, I added an external amp to power channels 10 & 11 so I've got a full 7.1 setup plus 4 height speakers (started with 5.1 plus 4 heights). Adding the rear surrounds made a surprisingly noticeable difference.

I'm going to disregard any impressions gained from the Atmos demo files I downloaded as they became problematic and eventually I couldn't get them to play audio at all. I suspect they may have been corrupt. The good news is that I was able to get a copy of the demo Blu-ray. It may be my imagination but the audio from the Blu-ray is closer to what I was expecting from Atmos encoded content. Although the height effect was subtle, things like overhead lightning and other outdoor environmental cues were a nice touch. 360 degree pans were nice and smooth. Personally though I still think there's more potential than we're seeing yet.

I gave TF4 another chance too. While I won't disagree with the fact that it makes extensive use of the full surround system, I still don't like it. The background music and dialog overpower the action effects. During intense scenes moments of impact have no punch. There are a few instances where a gunshots or canon blasts have a nice amount of pop to them, but it was inconsistent. Anyway, this isn't a review of TF4, but I am discouraged that it did not end up being the glorious Atmos demo I had hoped it would be. At least, not in my humble opinion.

Having used the new setup for a good week or so now, what has impressed me most about Dolby's new format is what it can do with non-Atmos soundtracks. That alone has made it a worthwhile upgrade for me.


----------



## NBPk402

Have you tried the voicing feature yet?


----------



## phillihp23

What speaker brand model did you use for the ceiling?
My understanding is that atmos recommends 90 degree dispersion, coaxial/concentric drivers.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> Have you tried the voicing feature yet?


Haven't found it yet. I assume it's a YPAO feature?




phillihp23 said:


> What speaker brand model did you use for the ceiling? My understanding is that atmos recommends 90 degree dispersion, coaxial/concentric drivers.


HTD MP-R80. I requested dispersion specs from HTD but they don't have measurements right now. They are coaxial speakers with pivoting tweeters. In my setup all but the front pair of height channels can be aimed directly at the listening area, and the fronts get to within 30-ish degrees, so I'm not too concerned about it.


----------



## bkeeler10

I think the dispersion was a concern mainly for in ceiling speakers that can only fire straight down. As long as you can aim the speakers such that all your seating positions are within the speaker's dispersion "cones" you're probably okay.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> Haven't found it yet. I assume it's a YPAO feature?
> 
> 
> HTD MP-R80. I requested dispersion specs from HTD but they don't have measurements right now. They are coaxial speakers with pivoting tweeters. In my setup all but the front pair of height channels can be aimed directly at the listening area, and the fronts get to within 30-ish degrees, so I'm not too concerned about it.


I don't know, but it is listed as a feature on their website.


----------



## Peter Loeser

I started getting my new subs set up last night and had to move the rear couch up about 5 inches, which forced the front couch up the same amount. This moved the MLP into slightly better positioning based on the Atmos spec, so I was curious if it would affect the sound. I re-ran a few clips from the demo Blu-ray and it definitely made a significant difference. Effects of the height channels were much more distinct, and there was a slight improvement in 360º soundstage. Overall it just sounded noticeably better to me. I'm a little surprised by this since many of the reviews of Atmos indicate that it's not particularly sensitive to being perfectly set up.

Here's my theory. All of the surround speakers for my base 7.1 layout are direct radiating, and the side surrounds had been at almost 90º to the MLP... just slightly behind. I think having those effectively moved back a few inches helped significantly to de-localize them, allowing them to blend in better with the others. I hope to have both subs positioned this evening and will try to run YPAO. I suspect that even in an optimal layout, with _this many_ speakers, auto room correction may be a bit more valuable.


----------



## Tonto

Are you able to run some frequency sweeps with REW. That would be interesting to see how the room interactions change with the ceiling speakers. Might have to consider alternative treatments, don't know.

I didn't look back in the thread to see if you had already done this, & don't remember.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Tonto said:


> Are you able to run some frequency sweeps with REW. That would be interesting to see how the room interactions change with the ceiling speakers. Might have to consider alternative treatments, don't know. I didn't look back in the thread to see if you had already done this, & don't remember.


Frequency sweeps of the ceiling speakers? Not yet. I suppose I could try to treat first reflections from them but there will be quite a few and I don't know that it would be worth the effort. I have been gradually upgrading room treatments trying to improve overall acoustics. I'm in the middle of some other changes to the room which will affect acoustics so I'll re-visit it after the dust settles.


----------



## Tonto

There's no doubt that treating the room for ceiling speakers will offer new challenges. I think it would, at the very least, be interesting to see any differences between the mains & ceiling speakers. Probably the easiest comparison since the mains get 1st dibs on 1st reflection treatments. I know you've got your hands full for now...if you get to it later that will be great. Enjoying the ride with you!


----------



## willis7469

I've been enjoying your thread also Peter. Iirc, I read that dolbys demo room had a very heavily treated ceiling. Curious to see how it turns out for you. More so in your other new "toys" though!


----------



## Peter Loeser

I had intentions of treating the ceiling as part of my acoustic upgrades. A ceiling fan and six Atmos height speakers make that a slightly more complicated task. I'm getting ready to redo my flooring (add carpet and build riser for 2nd row) so acoustics will be put on hold until that is done. I also want to paint my ceiling to match the walls before mounting any panels up there.


----------



## bkeeler10

Tonto said:


> Are you able to run some frequency sweeps with REW. That would be interesting to see how the room interactions change with the ceiling speakers. Might have to consider alternative treatments, don't know.
> 
> I didn't look back in the thread to see if you had already done this, & don't remember.


One of the tricky aspects of Atmos is being able to address the non-bed channels. As far as I know, at the moment the only devices capable of sending signal to the object-only speakers are ones that have a Dolby Atmos rendering chip in them. Also, the source signal and hardware need to "speak" Atmos to the renderer. It seems right now that the only way to do this is to encode metadata in a TrueHD bitstream.

Thus, you won't be able to measure the ceiling speakers with REW unless you physically plug them into a bed channel of the receiver temporarily to perform the measurements. And, once you have them, if you want to do some EQ to fix things, you won't be able to apply any outboard EQ of any sort for the non-bed channels unless you intercept the signal at the receiver pre-outs for those channels (which would then require an outboard amp for those speakers and a redundant A/D - D/A conversion).

Edit: Of course, any EQ ability built in to the receiver will be usable on the ceiling speakers.


----------



## Tonto

Great discussion guys, and with all of this, I think it goes back to ceiling speakers needing to be from the same company as you other speakers & timber matched. Will just make things so much easier...we will see.


----------



## bkeeler10

Tonto said:


> Great discussion guys, and with all of this, I think it goes back to ceiling speakers needing to be from the same company as you other speakers & timber matched. Will just make things so much easier...we will see.


Yes, I think this is ideal as it will keep timbre as close as possible. But EQ could further improve things -- there's no way a speaker mounted in the ceiling will sound just like the free-standing front speakers, or will sound like the on-wall surrounds.

I suppose this is where Audyssey in the Denons and YPAO with PEQ in the Yamahas will be of benefit. And there are reports elsewhere of using speakers from different manufacturers for the ceiling speakers. One of the first Atmos adopters over at AVS is using M&K speakers in the front, but using two pair of Tannoy speakers designed for commercial applications as on-ceiling speakers. After Audyssey does its magic, he reports a very seamless soundstage with no noticeable timbre shifts across all the speakers. 

I agree that using speakers timbre-matched from the same manufacturer using the same drivers is a good place to start and will probably minimize the amount of EQ needed (if the manufacturer makes a speaker suitable for in- or on-ceiling duty). However, a good EQ is a wonderful thing to have built in to the receiver, even more now with Atmos.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> I had intentions of treating the ceiling as part of my acoustic upgrades. A ceiling fan and six Atmos height speakers make that a slightly more complicated task. I'm getting ready to redo my flooring (add carpet and build riser for 2nd row) so acoustics will be put on hold until that is done. I also want to paint my ceiling to match the walls before mounting any panels up there.


What if... You made your acoustic panels with a hole cut where your ceiling speakers will be going? :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

I agree that timbre matching speakers and using EQ to compensate for non-timbre matched speakers are all great ways to improve the way a surround system blends together. My mains (LCR) are Paradigm, my listener level surrounds (front wide, sides, rears) are Definitive Tech (all the same model) and my heights are HTD (same in-ceiling model). However, I don't currently have any EQ applied, just manually calibrated distance and level settings. During the Atmos demo clips I have never found myself thinking "the sound of that bird changes when it flies from the front of the room, over my head, to the back of the room". I'm generally thinking, "wow, it sounds like there's an actual bird flying around me".

Sure, when I run the pink noise test tone, I can hear the different voicing as I go around the room to different brands of speakers, but from my experience that does not translate to a sub-par surround experience. I've had quite a few different speakers and surround configurations in this room, and I have found that good speaker and seating placement far outweighs subtle EQ changes to compensate for mismatched speakers. Again, this isn't ideal for everyone, and room correction is a quick and easy way to compensate for it.

I will admit that I tend to be pretty neutral on the topic of automated EQ. I'm not against it, and I definitely think it benefits some setups more than others, but I also trust my ears to know that if it sounds good to me, it's probably pretty good. There is one end of the spectrum that absolutely cannot live without the best room correction. I guess tend to lean slightly in the other direction.

Like anything in HT, the Atmos experience will vary quite a bit from one application to the next, so it's hard to say one method is right for everyone. I plan to do before/after YPAO comparisons for my upcoming review of the Yamaha receiver, so I'll save the meat of that discussion for the review.


----------



## Peter Loeser

ellisr63 said:


> What if... You made your acoustic panels with a hole cut where your ceiling speakers will be going? :T


I hadn't thought of that but it could definitely be done with the 2" thick panels I have on hand.


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> I agree that timbre matching speakers and using EQ to compensate for non-timbre matched speakers are all great ways to improve the way a surround system blends together. My mains (LCR) are Paradigm, my listener level surrounds (front wide, sides, rears) are Definitive Tech (all the same model) and my heights are HTD (same in-ceiling model). I don't currently have any EQ applied, just manually calibrated distance and level settings. During the Atmos demo clips I have never found myself thinking "the sound of that bird changes when it flies from the front of the room, over my head, to the back of the room". I'm generally thinking, "wow, it sounds like there's an actual bird flying around me".
> 
> Sure, when I run the pink noise test tone, I can hear the different voicing as I go around the room to different brands of speakers, but from my experience that does not translate to a sub-par surround experience. I've had quite a few different speakers and surround configurations in this room, and I have found that good speaker and seating placement, far outweighs subtle EQ changes to compensate for mismatched speakers. Again, this isn't ideal for everyone, and room correction is a quick and easy way to compensate for it.
> 
> I will admit that I tend to be pretty neutral on the topic of automated EQ. I'm not against it, and I definitely think it benefits some setups more than others, but I also trust my ears to know that if it sounds good to me, it's probably pretty good. There is one end of the spectrum that absolutely cannot live without the best room correction. I guess tend to lean slightly in the other direction.
> 
> Like anything in HT, the Atmos experience will vary quite a bit from one application to the next, so it's hard to say one method is right for everyone. I plan to do before/after YPAO comparisons for my upcoming review of the Yamaha receiver, so I'll save the meat of that discussion for the review.


With my DIY fronts, and my Klipsch surrounds I have noticed the same thing. I only hear a timber difference when I run pink noise. I never notice the difference while watching a movie or 5.1 music video.


----------



## bkeeler10

Interesting thoughts on timbre changes not being obvious on real material. My system uses three identical speakers across the front (mid-tweeter-woofer configuration), with the center turned horizontal and the sides vertical. Calibrated with Audyssey MultEQ XT Pro. Even with all that, when voices are slowly panned across the front stage, I detect subtle timbre shifts. I must be excessively sensitive to that!

Sorry to be drifting OT.


----------



## NBPk402

bkeeler10 said:


> Interesting thoughts on timbre changes not being obvious on real material. My system uses three identical speakers across the front (mid-tweeter-woofer configuration), with the center turned horizontal and the sides vertical. Calibrated with Audyssey MultEQ XT Pro. Even with all that, when voices are slowly panned across the front stage, I detect subtle timbre shifts. I must be excessively sensitive to that!
> 
> Sorry to be drifting OT.


Maybe that is because the front channels are closer together than the surrounds to the front?


----------



## bkeeler10

^^ Not quite following your train of thought there . . .


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Interesting thoughts on timbre changes not being obvious on real material. My system uses three identical speakers across the front (mid-tweeter-woofer configuration), with the center turned horizontal and the sides vertical. Calibrated with Audyssey MultEQ XT Pro. Even with all that, when voices are slowly panned across the front stage, I detect subtle timbre shifts. I must be excessively sensitive to that!
> 
> Sorry to be drifting OT.


That does seem excessive considering your setup. Have you tried temporarily placing the CC vertically? Perhaps some subtle differences in vert. vs horiz. dispersion are producing the effect you have noticed. Have you measured frequency response on all three? Are all three front channels crossed over to the sub at the same frequency? Does it happen with all source material, or just in some cases? Perhaps you just found a couple of poorly mixed dialog tracks, or your room is upsetting the response of one or more speakers based on placement (beyond what XT could correct). In theory there should be no detectable timbre shifts between three identical and calibrated speakers.


----------



## bkeeler10

Peter Loeser said:


> That does seem excessive considering your setup. Have you tried temporarily placing the CC vertically? Perhaps some subtle differences in vert. vs horiz. dispersion are producing the effect you have noticed. Have you measured frequency response on all three? Are all three front channels crossed over to the sub at the same frequency? Does it happen with all source material, or just in some cases? Perhaps you just found a couple of poorly mixed dialog tracks, or your room is upsetting the response of one or more speakers based on placement (beyond what XT could correct). In theory there should be no detectable timbre shifts between three identical and calibrated speakers.


I only notice it with panned voices (if a person is walking from one side of the screen to the other and the mixer has chosen to try to precisely place him across the soundstage). Pretty much any source that has that, I will notice it on. There is a scene in The Incredibles that is a torture test for this (Bob Parr in the office talking with the boss). I have not measured, since there's nothing in my setup that would allow me to do anything to fix it. Crossover is the same on all speakers.

I've thought about turning the CC vertical, but I couldn't leave it that way without raising the TV higher, which is non-trivial to do. I do think that's the primary culprit though. Even though the speaker is mid-tweeter-woofer in a true three way, not two-and-a-half way (and not a two-way mid-tweeter-mid), there is still going to be some off-axis comb filtering in the crossover region between the woofer and mid. As the calibration was done with various mic positions spaced horizontally, it can't be perfect. I may try turning the speaker just for fun some time. It does annoy me when I hear it, but I'm a little obsessive about this stuff. Not the only one around here, I'm sure :coocoo: :bigsmile:

I just thought of this, but it may be possible that at least some of what I'm hearing is a spatial shift, since the center is perhaps 1.5 feet lower than the sides. Anyway, this is why my next setup will be identical, identically-oriented speakers across the front, behind an AT screen.

I'm still cluttering your Atmos thread I'm afraid . . . so I will stop.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> I only notice it with panned voices (if a person is walking from one side of the screen to the other and the mixer has chosen to try to precisely place him across the soundstage). Pretty much any source that has that, I will notice it on. There is a scene in The Incredibles that is a torture test for this (Bob Parr in the office talking with the boss). I have not measured, since there's nothing in my setup that would allow me to do anything to fix it. Crossover is the same on all speakers.
> 
> I've thought about turning the CC vertical, but I couldn't leave it that way without raising the TV higher, which is non-trivial to do. I do think that's the primary culprit though. Even though the speaker is mid-tweeter-woofer in a true three way, not two-and-a-half way (and not a two-way mid-tweeter-mid), there is still going to be some off-axis comb filtering in the crossover region between the woofer and mid. As the calibration was done with various mic positions spaced horizontally, it can't be perfect. I may try turning the speaker just for fun some time. It does annoy me when I hear it, but I'm a little obsessive about this stuff. Not the only one around here, I'm sure :coocoo: :bigsmile:
> 
> I just thought of this, but it may be possible that at least some of what I'm hearing is a spatial shift, since the center is perhaps 1.5 feet lower than the sides. Anyway, this is why my next setup will be identical, identically-oriented speakers across the front, behind an AT screen.
> 
> I'm still cluttering your Atmos thread I'm afraid . . . so I will stop.


It might be worth starting a thread if you get the chance to experiment with some different setups to see if you notice any improvements. I think there could be a few potential causes. You're likely not the only one that has noticed or been bother by the issue. Perhaps others could chime in with some other suggestions too. I'd personally start by at least temporarily turning your CC vertical and putting it at the same height as your L&R, even if it blocks your TV... just to quickly test a couple of our theories. Your plan with the AT screen is something I'd like to do eventually as well.

I am curious to check out the dialog in the Incredibles scene you mentioned. It is one of my favorite movies for audio/sub testing. You might have just ruined that scene for me! :foottap:

And no worries... OT discussion is equally my doing. Also, I'd say most of us here are obsessive about our audio... nothing wrong with that if you ask me :bigsmile:


----------



## bkeeler10

Peter Loeser said:


> I am curious to check out the dialog in the Incredibles scene you mentioned. It is one of my favorite movies for audio/sub testing. You might have just ruined that scene for me! :foottap:


Heh, well some things can't be un-noticed once they're noticed, eh? To be clear, the boss' voice is the one being panned, not Bob's. The Incredibles is my go-to movie when making changes in my system or evaluating someone else's. Great sound design and I know it very well


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Heh, well some things can't be un-noticed once they're noticed, eh? To be clear, the boss' voice is the one being panned, not Bob's. The Incredibles is my go-to movie when making changes in my system or evaluating someone else's. Great sound design and I know it very well


Totally agree! Come to think of it, this is one I have yet to try with the Atmos decoder. It will be interesting to see what it can do with a really well engineered non-Atmos soundtrack. Should be fun with the new PSA subs too.


----------



## bkeeler10

Peter Loeser said:


> Totally agree! Come to think of it, this is one I have yet to try with the Atmos decoder. It will be interesting to see what it can do with a really well engineered non-Atmos soundtrack. Should be fun with the new PSA subs too.


Way to bring it back around! :clap:


----------



## NBPk402

bkeeler10 said:


> ^^ Not quite following your train of thought there . . .


It might be easier to hear a difference with the front 3 speakers vs the fronts to surrounds due to the distance they are away from each other. If I turn on only my rears vs only the fronts I can hear the difference, but if they are all on at the same time I cannot hear any difference in tonality.


----------



## Tonto

Peter, when my wife was looking at carpet samples for our theater, the salesman sent her home with a pad sample. Claimed it to be acoustical pad. It was a lot denser, kinda like rubber impregnated foam. I have not researched it yet as my theater is on hold. But it looked promising. Worth a look at least.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Tonto said:


> Peter, when my wife was looking at carpet samples for our theater, the salesman sent her home with a pad sample. Claimed it to be acoustical pad. It was a lot denser, kinda like rubber impregnated foam. I have not researched it yet as my theater is on hold. But it looked promising. Worth a look at least.


I wouldn't mind investing in a good quality pad if it was proven to help keep some sound from being transferred through the floor, as our HT is above the kitchen/dining room. Not sure though how much it can do to block bass from getting through. We will likely go with something toward the premium end since we like a nice squishy carpet


----------



## NBPk402

Peter Loeser said:


> I wouldn't mind investing in a good quality pad if it was proven to help keep some sound from being transferred through the floor, as our HT is above the kitchen/dining room. Not sure though how much it can do to block bass from getting through. We will likely go with something toward the premium end since we like a nice squishy carpet


We just went with the Premium pad for our setup too I like the fact that we can still feel the bass through our raised subfloor. :T


----------



## Peter Loeser

We had some family in town part of the weekend and watched Gravity on Sunday night with the Dolby Surround decoder. REALLY good!


----------



## bkeeler10

I've heard that about Gravity with DSU. Just wait until Gravity comes out with a native Atmos mix in February. It would be interesting to then compare the two.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> I've heard that about Gravity with DSU. Just wait until Gravity comes out with a native Atmos mix in February. It would be interesting to then compare the two.


Absolutely. As I've said, I've been most impressed by the way DSU can can enhance non-Atmos material, but I think that's because we're far from seeing what can really be done with Atmos mixing for home theater. I'm looking forward to watching it develop. It will be interesting to see what elements get added to Gravity.


----------



## Dream Theater

If I am running a 5.1.2 atmos setup and I have two rows of seating should the ceiling speakers be between the rows?


----------



## Peter Loeser

Take a look at the setup guide here. Scroll down to the 2nd diagram for the recommended angle range for the top middle speaker. It's a little more tricky for those of us with two rows but generally placing them between the rows should work ok. If your main listening position is in the front row, I'd place them just behind the front row. Calibrate your system from whichever row is used most and you should get pretty good results.


----------



## Dream Theater

Peter Loeser said:


> Take a look at the setup guide here. Scroll down to the 2nd diagram for the recommended angle range for the top middle speaker. It's a little more tricky for those of us with two rows but generally placing them between the rows should work ok. If your main listening position is in the front row, I'd place them just behind the front row. Calibrate your system from whichever row is used most and you should get pretty good results.


Thanks Peter ! That helps


----------



## KPWD

Anyone found a good Demo disc for Atmos? Have my setup in but want to see if it is working correctly, watched the turtles the other night and it seemed like it was working correct but am wondering if there is a good demo. Current set up is 7.2.4 using front highs as top fronts.


----------



## nheintz

KPWD said:


> Anyone found a good Demo disc for Atmos? Have my setup in but want to see if it is working correctly, watched the turtles the other night and it seemed like it was working correct but am wondering if there is a good demo. Current set up is 7.2.4 using front highs as top fronts.


What receiver do you have?


----------



## NBPk402

They really should include a demo disc when they sell the AVR.


----------



## KPWD

nheintz said:


> What receiver do you have?


 I have Onkyo TX-NR1030 and a 5150 to drive the other two overheads.


----------



## KPWD

ellisr63 said:


> They really should include a demo disc when they sell the AVR.


 There is demo stuff on YouTube but not sure how it is coming into the receiver because it is not seen as Having Atmos content.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> I have Onkyo TX-NR1030 and a 5150 to drive the other two overheads.


Can you post a picture of the configuration screen on the Onkyo? Have you run AccuEQ or manually calibrated speaker distance and level? The effect may be very subtle in some movies. I haven't tried TMNT yet, but Transformers 4 was a disappointment to me. Try the Dolby surround upmixer with a standard movie soundtrack or even some two-channel audio and your height speakers should be active. There is a demo disc from Dolby but it was distributed to retailers and other contacts within the industry. Good luck finding one.


----------



## KPWD

Peter Loeser said:


> Can you post a picture of the configuration screen on the Onkyo? Have you run AccuEQ or manually calibrated speaker distance and level? The effect may be very subtle in some movies. I haven't tried TMNT yet, but Transformers 4 was a disappointment to me. Try the Dolby surround upmixer with a standard movie soundtrack or even some two-channel audio and your height speakers should be active. There is a demo disc from Dolby but it was distributed to retailers and other contacts within the industry. Good luck finding one.











Yes I ran EQ. There were parts of TMNT that I could here the overhead channels pretty good, you need to try that movie.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> View attachment 78377
> 
> 
> Yes I ran EQ. There were parts of TMNT that I could here the overhead channels pretty good, you need to try that movie.


Looks like you are properly set up. I will probably give TMNT a try soon. It might honestly be worth starting a thread here to list good demo scenes from Atmos-enabled Blu-rays as the selection grows.


----------



## willis7469

Peter, I wish I could speak for the atmos version,as I'm set up for it. But, I have to say, the core 7.1 track is absolutely outstanding. Lots of nuanced bass in different textures. Well done all the way around. Since I'm in your "atmos" thread, I'll ask your thoughts on DTS-X. It seems we'll have to choose one or the other, but details are sketchy so far(that I can find). How do you think it'll compare? I've see it championed in other places due to what's said to be a less intrusive installation,while matching performance. Just wondering what you think.


----------



## Peter Loeser

willis7469 said:


> Peter, I wish I could speak for the atmos version,as I'm set up for it. But, I have to say, the core 7.1 track is absolutely outstanding. Lots of nuanced bass in different textures. Well done all the way around.


I have found myself to be in the minority regarding this one. I have swapped out the Yamaha for a Denon now (Yamaha review long overdue but coming soon) so I'll be going through the movie collection again for the Denon review. I'll revisit TF4 as the Denon is Atmos capable as well. I agree there is some fantastic bass and lots of sound elements during the action sequences. 




willis7469 said:


> Since I'm in your "atmos" thread, I'll ask your thoughts on DTS-X. It seems we'll have to choose one or the other, but details are sketchy so far(that I can find). How do you think it'll compare? I've see it championed in other places due to what's said to be a less intrusive installation,while matching performance. Just wondering what you think.


DTS:X info is still pretty scarce but it sounds like a contender. Dolby and DTS formats have survived side by side for a while now so we may not be forced to choose one or the other exclusively. Although I have somewhat committed to Atmos with my in-ceiling speaker installation, I'm hoping to let more of the dust settle around the new formats before buying a receiver. Hopefully there will be some options with both DTS:X available for us to review later this year.


----------



## selden

KPWD said:


> Anyone found a good Demo disc for Atmos? Have my setup in but want to see if it is working correctly, watched the turtles the other night and it seemed like it was working correct but am wondering if there is a good demo. Current set up is 7.2.4 using front highs as top fronts.


There are some Dolby Atmos demos available at http://www.demo-world.eu/2d-demo-trailers-hd/ 
Scroll down to the Dolby section. Be sure to download the lossless versions, which preserve the Atmos metadata.

Edited to add: 

None of the feature-length Atmos movies released so far make much use of the overheads, although many of their soundtracks seem to have taken advantage of the better control available when placing audio objects. Even movies which were released in cinemas as Atmos but which have been released on BD with DTS-HD MA soundtracks sound very good. _Maze Runner_ seems to be the one people like the most in that regard, especially when upmixed using the new Dolby Surround upmixer.


----------



## bkeeler10

willis7469 said:


> Peter, I wish I could speak for the atmos version,as I'm set up for it. But, I have to say, the core 7.1 track is absolutely outstanding. Lots of nuanced bass in different textures. Well done all the way around. Since I'm in your "atmos" thread, I'll ask your thoughts on DTS-X. It seems we'll have to choose one or the other, but details are sketchy so far(that I can find). How do you think it'll compare? I've see it championed in other places due to what's said to be a less intrusive installation,while matching performance. Just wondering what you think.


Yes, not much out on DTS:X at this point, but they have been saying that it will conform to your speaker layout. So in theory a properly set up Atmos system will be fully usable when setting up for and playing DTS:X tracks. Now, whether they have come up with a layout that they deem ideal for use with their mixes is yet to be announced (supposed to know more in March I guess). But at least DTS vs Dolby is not like Auro 3D vs Dolby . . . IOW I expect DTS:X and Dolby Atmos will coexist in the future, just as the TrueHD and DTS-HDMA codecs have for the past several years. Whether Auro will continue to coexist (or exist at all), as it can in current Denon Atmos receivers, is more debatable IMO.


----------



## Peter Loeser

selden said:


> None of the feature-length Atmos movies released so far make much use of the overheads, although many of their soundtracks seem to have taken advantage of the better control available when placing audio objects. Even movies which were released in cinemas as Atmos but which have been released on BD with DTS-HD MA soundtracks sound very good. _Maze Runner_ seems to be the one people like the most in that regard, especially when upmixed using the new Dolby Surround upmixer.


I have noticed this as well. _Gravity_ is another one that seems to have benefited from the Atmos cinema mix (although I believe it will also get a future Atmos release on Blu-ray). It sounds great with the new Dolby upmixer. Thanks for the tip about _Maze Runner_, I may take a look at that one too.



bkeeler10 said:


> Yes, not much out on DTS:X at this point, but they have been saying that it will conform to your speaker layout. So in theory a properly set up Atmos system will be fully usable when setting up for and playing DTS:X tracks. Now, whether they have come up with a layout that they deem ideal for use with their mixes is yet to be announced (supposed to know more in March I guess). But at least DTS vs Dolby is not like Auro 3D vs Dolby . . . IOW I expect DTS:X and Dolby Atmos will coexist in the future, just as the TrueHD and DTS-HDMA codecs have for the past several years. Whether Auro will continue to coexist (or exist at all), as it can in current Denon Atmos receivers, is more debatable IMO.


My thoughts exactly. We shall see.


----------



## KPWD

What are thoughts on overhead speakers for Atmos? My center, left and right are triad in room golds and my surrounds and rears are niles fx770 bi pole di pole and are set to bi pole, I was thinking about the niles cm7fx for the four atmos in the ceiling. Thoughts?


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> What are thoughts on overhead speakers for Atmos? My center, left and right are triad in room golds and my surrounds and rears are niles fx770 bi pole di pole and are set to bi pole, I was thinking about the niles cm7fx for the four atmos in the ceiling. Thoughts?


My honest opinion is that $200+ each for Atmos ceiling speakers is overkill, but if you are happy with your existing Niles gear and have the budget for the CM7FX in the ceiling, I think they'll do a fine job. How far above your head (seated) will the ceiling speakers be? If they are high enough, and you don't have many seats in the room, you could probably go with a single tweeter design and be just fine. Mine have a single pivoting tweeter and work well for me with a 9ft ceiling height.


----------



## KPWD

Peter Loeser said:


> My honest opinion is that $200+ each for Atmos ceiling speakers is overkill, but if you are happy with your existing Niles gear and have the budget for the CM7FX in the ceiling, I think they'll do a fine job. How far above your head (seated) will the ceiling speakers be? If they are high enough, and you don't have many seats in the room, you could probably go with a single tweeter design and be just fine. Mine have a single pivoting tweeter and work well for me with a 9ft ceiling height.


 My ceilings are standard 8', I first tried using speakers I had already, but just not satisfied, and the niles cm7fx are a close Mach to the surrounds I have.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> My ceilings are standard 8', I first tried using speakers I had already, but just not satisfied, and the niles cm7fx are a close Mach to the surrounds I have.


The most ideal case would be very closely matched speakers throughout the room, so I think the Niles speakers will integrate well with the rest of your system.


----------



## KPWD

I have been talking back and forth with niles and they were saying the fx series are just for surrounds and backs, and I should go with the hd series. After reading Dolby Atmos instructions it makes me wonder what one to use. The fx is a bi pole di pole switchable speaker that I think would work better for atmos ceiling speakers if I set them to bi pole wouldn't I get what Dolby wants? More of a diffused dispersion? Here is the last thing I sent niles with no response yet. What speaker would have a wider dispersion rate? CM7fx or CM7HD? These are instructon from Dolby. Dolby Atmos audio is mixed using discrete, full-range audio objects that may move around anywhere in three-dimensional space. With this in mind, overhead speakers should complement the frequency response, output, and power-handling capabilities of the listener-level speakers. Choose overhead speakers that are timbre matched as closely as possible to the primary listener-level speakers. Overhead speakers with a wide dispersion pattern are desirable for use in a Dolby Atmos system. This will ensure the closest replication of the cinematic environment, where overhead speakers are placed high above the listeners. 45 degrees speakers may be mounted facing directly downward. For speakers with narrower dispersion patterns, those with aimable or angled elements should be angled toward the primary listening position.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> I have been talking back and forth with niles and they were saying the fx series are just for surrounds and backs, and I should go with the hd series. After reading Dolby Atmos instructions it makes me wonder what one to use. The fx is a bi pole di pole switchable speaker that I think would work better for atmos ceiling speakers if I set them to bi pole wouldn't I get what Dolby wants? More of a diffused dispersion? Here is the last thing I sent niles with no response yet. What speaker would have a wider dispersion rate? CM7fx or CM7HD? These are instructon from Dolby. Dolby Atmos audio is mixed using discrete, full-range audio objects that may move around anywhere in three-dimensional space. With this in mind, overhead speakers should complement the frequency response, output, and power-handling capabilities of the listener-level speakers. Choose overhead speakers that are timbre matched as closely as possible to the primary listener-level speakers. Overhead speakers with a wide dispersion pattern are desirable for use in a Dolby Atmos system. This will ensure the closest replication of the cinematic environment, where overhead speakers are placed high above the listeners. 45 degrees speakers may be mounted facing directly downward. For speakers with narrower dispersion patterns, those with aimable or angled elements should be angled toward the primary listening position.


They are basically saying that the best case would be a surround system consisting of identical (or perfectly timbre-matched), mono-pole speakers, placed far enough from the listening area that they were difficult to localize and would distribute sound fairly equally to all seating positions. Dipole speakers help to create a more diffused surround sound in cases where they must be placed fairly close to the listener(s), which is very common in home theater. Again, if you can timbre match all of your speakers that's excellent. If not, don't obsess over it.

How many seating positions do you have? If you have just one row of two or three seats I think you'd be ok to go with a monopole (single tweeter) design and place them within Dolby's guidelines for Atmos installations (available on their website I believe). Wide dispersion is more critical if you have more seats to cover, i.e. two or more rows, or if you are stuck with a seating location that is significantly off-axis from the speakers.


----------



## bkeeler10

I think the ideal situation is to have monopole ceiling speakers that are aimable (which means in-ceiling speakers with aimable drivers OR on-ceiling speakers on brackets or with a non-square box that points the drivers to the listening position more or less). Having speakers that fire straight to the floor is probably not ideal unless you really can keep all your seats within their dispersion pattern. Not easy to do with standard 8' ceilings (if your ceilings are 12' it would be much easier). Also, obtaining the dispersion pattern of most consumer-level speakers is just about impossible, since most companies making speakers for residential use do not publish that information. Even if they do, they will not tell you how far up in frequency that dispersion angle applies.

The problem I see with a bipole speaker on the ceiling is that you will have half of the array pointing at you, but the other half pointing away and filling the room with additional reflections that are probably not ideal.


----------



## KPWD

On all there in ceiling you can aim the tweeter but not sure about the rest.


----------



## KPWD

I have a chance to pick up some So nance 624tr speakers.Would they be a good pick for in ceiling atmos speakers?


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> I have a chance to pick up some So nance 624tr speakers.Would they be a good pick for in ceiling atmos speakers?


I'm not familiar with these, but based on specs they look like they should do a fine job. It's really hard to tell for sure until you test them in your system.


----------



## KPWD

I have a So nance 5150 amp and like the quality of it so in searching for some good speakers for overhead found 2 sets of the 624tr speakers for 350 used. They are like new and cost the original owner 1400 bucks. They actually show measurements for dispersion pattern to make it easy to find were to locate. Have two in already and they sound great.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> I have a So nance 5150 amp and like the quality of it so in searching for some good speakers for overhead found 2 sets of the 624tr speakers for 350 used. They are like new and cost the original owner 1400 bucks. They actually show measurements for dispersion pattern to make it easy to find were to locate. Have two in already and they sound great.


Excellent! Curious - could you elaborate on the dispersion pattern measurements? Did they come with a diagram of the pattern or specs in terms of response over a range of angles?


----------



## KPWD

It was cone shaped dispersion diagram at different ceiling heights and showed measurements at standing and seated. I will find it and see if I can post it.


----------



## KPWD

Here is a link http://www.manualslib.com/manual/319164/-S621tr.html


----------



## bkeeler10

^^ Well that's certainly more information than you're going to get from most companies. Looks like for an 8' ceiling with seated ear height, you'd want to be no further than 4' 2" off axis from the speaker. They still don't tell you how many dB down you would be at that point (I'm guessing between 3 and 6 dB) or at what what frequencies that rule applies. But still more helpful than usual. Better yet would be if they would provide polar plots at octave intervals. But that's asking a lot for a maker of non-commercial loudspeakers.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Good info and thanks for the link. And I agree, it is difficult to find that info for most in-ceiling HT speakers.


----------



## KPWD

I don't know about all ceiling speakers but these you can independently adjust db on tweeter up and down but comes set to zero. Like them a lot so far, now need to plan my attack on the fronts and how to get the wire to them.


----------



## Peter Loeser

KPWD said:


> I don't know about all ceiling speakers but these you can independently adjust db on tweeter up and down but comes set to zero. Like them a lot so far, now need to plan my attack on the fronts and how to get the wire to them.


The tweeters on mine have -3/0/+3 setting as well. Top middle and rear middle are set to 0, and top front are set to +3 since they are a bit farther off axis to listening position. I had to move my seating up a bit when I installed the rear sub and noticed a difference in sound coming from the overheard speakers immediately, so I think I was right at the limit of good dispersion for the front set.


----------



## KPWD

My room is not big enough for six overheads, it's not a dedicated home theater room, sort of a multi purpose family room with seating kind of all over, sounds good though.


----------



## KPWD

Speakers all in and it sounds great.


----------



## NBPk402

KPWD said:


> Speakers all in and it sounds great.


Is it an optical illusion... It appears that your seating is not aligned with your TV or speakers?


----------



## KPWD

There is only one large couch that really lines up correct and it is moved out of position do to working in there. Hard room to work with.


----------



## NBPk402

KPWD said:


> There is only one large couch that really lines up correct and it is moved out of position do to working in there. Hard room to work with.


As long as you have at least one seat lined up... At least one person can fully enjoy the experience. Did you tune the speakers to the one seat on the couch? :T


----------



## KPWD

That I did, but want to find an Atmos demo of some kind to test it.


----------



## hnupe3

There is a dolby atoms demo blu-ray on ebay but it is very expensive


----------



## bkeeler10

No need to pay for the disc if your bluray player can play m2ts files or if you can burn a bluray disc. Just go to demo-world.eu and find the rips there.


----------



## KPWD

Have a oppo 103d I guess it will play those types of files. Thanks


----------



## bkeeler10

Yeah I've read many reports of people with the Oppos that can play them from a USB drive without a problem. You should be good to go.


----------



## Peter Loeser

bkeeler10 said:


> Yeah I've read many reports of people with the Oppos that can play them from a USB drive without a problem. You should be good to go.


Should work on any player that can handle Dolby TrueHD soundtracks.


----------



## bkeeler10

Peter Loeser said:


> Should work on any player that can handle Dolby TrueHD soundtracks.


Unless it can't play files from USB ...  Then he'd need to burn a disc.


----------



## KPWD

According to the specs the Oppo 103 should be able to play from USB. We shall see.


----------



## bkeeler10

Yes the Oppo 10x definitely will. I think I know what Peter meant. Just giving him a hard time.


----------



## Nitrofreakman

bkeeler10 said:


> No need to pay for the disc if your bluray player can play m2ts files or if you can burn a bluray disc. Just go to demo-world.eu and find the rips there.


My apologies if this is slightly OT..but how do you download the m2ts files? It appears that every file I tried to download wasn't available, with this message "PLEASE USE A DOWNLOADMANAGER – FILE NOT FOUND ? LEAVE ME A MAIL !!
ENJOY THE SERVICE AND HELP ME TO KEEP THE SERVER COSTS AS LOW AS POSSIBLE !" 

I'm really not sure what the message means. Maybe the site doesn't like Safari ( I run Mac ). Thanks for linking the site, if I could actually download the files, it would be golden! If you could kick me in the right direction, that would be fantastic. 

I downloaded the Dolby ATMOS demo BluRay from Kick(Please DO NOT ignore or attempt to evade our language rules!) torrents, even though I currently run a 5.3 system. The disk is mixed so well that even without the extra ceiling speakers, the audio mix is quite impressive, giving you the impression that extra speakers are present, even though they aren't. Although I'm interested to see where these new format goes, I'm not ready to jump in quite yet..I've learned from the past that it's usually better to let new tech mature a little before delving in..it's just more cost effective in the long run. Thank-you for being one of the early adopter, it sure helps the rest of us that are on the fence. I can see this being great in huge HT rooms ( or rooms with high ceilings ), where the speakers could be far enough apart that 'gaps' may be heard with a regular surround setup. It'll be neat to see where this all goes, and how refined it will become as the kinks are ironed out and the tech matures.

*edit: I wasn't trying to ignore the language rules, the name of the torrent site is what it is, Kick(rear-end)torrents, so sorry if that's how my post came out.


----------



## bkeeler10

Go to demo-world.eu, point to the "Trailers" header and click on "2D Demo Trailerss (HD)" Scroll about a quarter of the way down until you get to the "Dolby" heading, where you will see Amaze, Conductor, Leaf, and Unfold at the top of the list. Just be sure to download the TrueHD 7.1 Atmos files, not the Dolby Digital files, of course.


----------



## Grndzro

Good afternoon. I am in the process of building a dedicated home theater in my basement. The room is approximately 16' wide by 19' long. I am using the following for A/V gear:

Onkyo 11.2 Atmos A/V Receiver - TX-NR3030
Dual Sunfire HRSI Subwoofer Amplifiers

Speakers 
LCR - Sunfire CRW3C
Surround Left - Sunfire CRW2
Surround Right - Sunfire CRW2
Rear Left - Sunfire CRW2
Rear Right - Sunfire CRW2
Dual In-Wall Sunfire HRSI8CAB Subwoofers

The main question I had is in regards to the Atmos speakers because it doesn't look like Sunfire has any. Can you make a recommendation for the 4 Atmos in-ceiling speakers preferably Sunfire, Niles, or Jamo.

Thank you.


----------



## Peter Loeser

Grndzro said:


> Good afternoon. I am in the process of building a dedicated home theater in my basement. The room is approximately 16' wide by 19' long. I am using the following for A/V gear:
> 
> Onkyo 11.2 Atmos A/V Receiver - TX-NR3030
> Dual Sunfire HRSI Subwoofer Amplifiers
> 
> Speakers
> LCR - Sunfire CRW3C
> Surround Left - Sunfire CRW2
> Surround Right - Sunfire CRW2
> Rear Left - Sunfire CRW2
> Rear Right - Sunfire CRW2
> Dual In-Wall Sunfire HRSI8CAB Subwoofers
> 
> The main question I had is in regards to the Atmos speakers because it doesn't look like Sunfire has any. Can you make a recommendation for the 4 Atmos in-ceiling speakers preferably Sunfire, Niles, or Jamo.
> 
> Thank you.


I would say if Sunfire makes an in-ceiling speaker, then that would be the best option. I'm not personally familiar with in-ceiling models from any of those brands.


----------

