IMAX Enhanced

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Not necessarily because, all TVs may not adopt and support HDR10+. HDR10+ is not going to benefit the consumer, if their TV won't support it, and will never be updated by firmware.. LG is not going to support HDR10+ for sure because, HDR10+ is a replication of Dolby Vision develop by Samsung, which is LG's main competitor. LG is currently supporting and has implemented Dolby Vision on their TVs, and they will not support HDR10+. The only brands that's onboard to support HDR10+ as of now is Samsung (themselves) and Panasonic. Vizio, TCL and Sony are basically economical brands, and I doubt they're be willing to pay a license fee for HDR10+ to Samsung because, they don't want the extra expense, and it will defeat the purpose of their TVs being an economical product. I see that you have a Samsung TV, so you should be HDR10+ ready.

They don't have to pay the same royalties as DV(its more expensive), literally every negative thing you attribute to 10+ can be said about DV from someone with a Samsung and yes I am 10+ capable.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

They don't have to pay the same royalties as DV(its more expensive), literally every negative thing you attribute to 10+ can be said about DV from someone with a Samsung and yes I am 10+ capable.

I wasn't trying to advocate against HDR10+, I was stating the facts about its inavailabilities to all manufacturers, and vice-vera to Dolby Vision as well. I wasn't favoring Dolby Vision. As for licensing Dolby Vision, they're not only paying for the format, but they're paying for the name, and logo. That's why Dolby Vision is more expensive to license. Actually, no manufacturer is required to support neither format, when HDR is the
norm for all brand of TVs, and the companies doesn't have to pay anything for it. Most likely the lower end brands will remain only with HDR and not license HDR10+ nor Dolby Vision due to economical reasons. If Vizio and TCL or any other low end brand do decide to support HDR10+ or Dolby Vision, they will be force to increase the price of their TVs, to supplement the extra cost for licensing a premium feature, and then the manufacturers will pass that extra cost to the consumer.

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

They don't have to pay the same royalties as DV(its more expensive), literally every negative thing you attribute to 10+ can be said about DV from someone with a Samsung and yes I am 10+ capable.

Originally Posted by slimdude

I wasn't trying to advocate against HDR10+, I was stating the facts about its inavailabilities to all manufacturers, and vice-vera to Dolby Vision as well. I wasn't favoring Dolby Vision. Actually, no manufacturer is required to license and support either format especially when, HDR is the norm for all brand of TVs, and the companies doesn't have to pay anything for it. Most likely the lower end brands will remain only with HDR and not license HDR10+ nor Dolby Vision due to economical reasons. If Vizio and TCL or any other low end brand do decide to support HDR10+ or Dolby Vision, they will be force to increase the price of their TVs, to supplement the extra cost for licensing a premium feature, and then the manufacturers will pass that extra cost to the consumer.

Oh wow you guys are aware that the 5 and 6 series TCL has Dolby Vision? Lets see that means you can buy a TCL 55S515 for $399 (BB for example). Where's the price increase?

[avs commenter]

Originally Posted by slimdude

I wasn't trying to advocate against HDR10+, I was stating the facts about its inavailabilities to all manufacturers, and vice-vera to Dolby Vision as well. I wasn't favoring Dolby Vision. As for licensing Dolby Vision, they're not only paying for the format, but they're paying for the name, and logo. That's why Dolby Vision is more expensive to license. Actually, no manufacturer is required to support neither format, when HDR is the
norm for all brand of TVs, and the companies doesn't have to pay anything for it. Most likely the lower end brands will remain only with HDR and not license HDR10+ nor Dolby Vision due to economical reasons. If Vizio and TCL or any other low end brand do decide to support HDR10+ or Dolby Vision, they will be force to increase the price of their TVs, to supplement the extra cost for licensing a premium feature, and then the manufacturers will pass that extra cost to the consumer.

Both Vizio and TCL had Dolby Vision before Sony! LOL

And since when is Sony a budget brand?

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

Oh wow you guys are aware that the 5 and 6 series TCL has Dolby Vision? Lets see that means you can buy a TCL 55S515 for $399 (BB for example). Where's the price increase?

This must be new, so when did all of this come about?

[avs commenter]

Vizio was the first company to release a TV with DV back in 2016

[JohnAV]

Originally Posted by slimdude

This must be new, so when did all of this come about?

See TCL smart TVs are going all in with Dolby Vision in 2018 - Tech Hive

Was announced CES 2018 timeframe. They have been a popular choice for gamers.

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by JohnAV

Oh wow you guys are aware that the 5 and 6 series TCL has Dolby Vision? Lets see that means you can buy a TCL 55S515 for $399 (BB for example). Where's the price increase?

I was referring in the beginning when it was hardware that brought on the premium. But I am glad its cheaper. Personally wont be investing in another TV till it can do what my Panasonic can

[tcripe]

Originally Posted by avs commenter

Vizio was the first company to release a TV with DV back in 2016

I have that TV (2016 M Series) hahaha its still holding up. Not my main tv anymore but, its still a good tv that vizio still updates surprisingly.

[ROSS.T.G.]

I read from another site that has performed some tests that the audio portion is just a DSP mode that boosts low end and dialogue. Apparently it bypasses settings in the AVR. The more I learn about it the more I don’t like it.

[sapiendut]

Well, the original DTS “special sauce” from way back when was boosted rears and sub. So not much have changed I guess.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by sapiendut

Well, the original DTS “special sauce” from way back when was boosted rears and sub. So not much have changed I guess.

The original DTS didn’t bypass settings in AVR’s though. That’s what this new DSP mode does. I wonder if it also applies a high frequency roll off as well.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

I read from another site that has performed some tests that the audio portion is just a DSP mode that boosts low end and dialogue. Apparently it bypasses settings in the AVR. The more I learn about it the more I don’t like it.

Originally Posted by sapiendut

Well, the original DTS “special sauce” from way back when was boosted rears and sub. So not much have changed I guess.

DTS Neural:X does the same thing and people rave about it being more "immersive" than Dolby Surround so...

Myself, I find it annoying when dialogue drifts to the rears and heights, so it's DSU only here - unless the encode is native DTS:X

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by King Crimson

I can't wait. Personally love DTS over Dolby and I believe DTS X sounds better. Plus more HDR10+ content is only a better thing.

DTS has yet to innovate anything and performance of Dolby formats has been equal or better in Dolby's favor, so why?

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

The original DTS didn’t bypass settings in AVR’s though. That’s what this new DSP mode does. I wonder if it also applies a high frequency roll off as well.

I’m wondering about that too. From what I can see using my AudioControl RTA, it doesn’t seem so. However, I think due to the bloated bass, it makes it sounds like there is a little roll off. I personally only have one title (well, my client has that one title). He also prefers the imax enhanced to be turned off.

[ROSS.T.G.]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

DTS Neural:X does the same thing and people rave about it being more "immersive" than Dolby Surround so...

Myself, I find it annoying when dialogue drifts to the rears and heights, so it's DSU only here - unless the encode is native DTS:X

Yeah some titles seem to push a little aggressively.

Originally Posted by sapiendut

I’m wondering about that too. From what I can see using my AudioControl RTA, it doesn’t seem so. However, I think due to the bloated bass, it makes it sounds like there is a little roll off. I personally only have one title (well, my client has that one title). He also prefers the imax enhanced to be turned off.

I can see that. When I was using the Audyssey Reference curve for a few weeks bass sounded a little bloated. Switched back to Flat and everything including bass sounds more balanced and nuanced. I just find it odd that the DSP mode bypasses crossovers and what not.

[gotmule]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

DTS Neural:X does the same thing and people rave about it being more "immersive" than Dolby Surround so...

Myself, I find it annoying when dialogue drifts to the rears and heights, so it's DSU only here - unless the encode is native DTS:X

Agreed... but I do the love the intentional use of vocals in overheads/heights as effects. Intercoms, computers, voices inside a helmet or a head, or directional queues of voices always are appreciated in either an Atmos mix or DTS-X track.

IMAX enhanced looks like it is going to attempt to give you a phantom speaker location by steering sounds to multiple speakers instead of just where they were intended. Not so sure how that is going to go over.

[sapiendut]

Originally Posted by ROSS.T.G.

I can see that. When I was using the Audyssey Reference curve for a few weeks bass sounded a little bloated. Switched back to Flat and everything including bass sounds more balanced and nuanced. I just find it odd that the DSP mode bypasses crossovers and what not.

Yeah. It’s quite a let down, to be honest. But I’ve lost respect towards IMAX when they completely f-up their branding with LIEmax and watering it down further by using regular digital camera with imax stickers, so to speak.

DTS is only doing what IMAX ordered. It’s akin to going to a Gordon Ramsay’s restaurant and paid him to cook the sea-bass (see what I did there?) longer and use your own recipe instead of his.

When you see the 2019 DTS demo disc, you won’t even see IMAX Enhanced as part of DTS tech.

[Geoff D]

IMAX: It's All About The Sizzle™

[King Crimson]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

DTS has yet to innovate anything and performance of Dolby formats has been equal or better in Dolby's favor, so why?

LMAO 5.1 MA sounds better than TrueHD Every time. DTS has always done Dolby, but better.