Dolby Atmos coming soon for home use

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by BLMN

I so wish my onkyo receiver (HT-R990) was upgradable to dolby atmos.

If anyone wants this format to succeed, they will make an add-on unit to do just that.

[Lentulus Batiatus]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

If anyone wants this format to succeed, they will make an add-on unit to do just that.

Why? What other new audio format releases came with equipment add-ons to get your current gear to work Can't think of any. If your receiver was Dolby Digital but not dts there wasn't a dts box to add on. Nor any TrueHD or dtsHD-MA add-ons. If you want to upgrade to Atmos and don't have an upgradable receiver then you need to buy a new one. Besides, any sort of add-on device will cost as much as a new unit all together. Just plain dumb idea all around.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Why? What other new audio format releases came with equipment add-ons to get your current gear to work Can't think of any. If your receiver was Dolby Digital but not dts there wasn't a dts box to add on. Nor any TrueHD or dtsHD-MA add-ons. If you want to upgrade to Atmos and don't have an upgradable receiver then you need to buy a new one. Besides, any sort of add-on device will cost as much as a new unit all together. Just plain dumb idea all around.

Compression formats did not have to power speakers. Granted, if you wanted to go to 6.1 or 7.1, you needed a new receiver, but for 5.1, you didn't.


It was a simple matter to decode the codec to PCM, and feed distinct and discrete channels to a receiver. I've been doing this for years to a 7.1 receiver, with no decoding, and I'm as dumb as a board.


Perhaps you never noticed this capability in a player, or have a receiver that automatically decodes the codec. That's very nice, and I'm glad you didn't have to burn out any brain cells getting the job done. It's quite possible you have very few spares.


What you may not be aware of is a phenomenon called "pass-through". It's very technical, but exists on most of the less expensive receivers, and allows a signal to "pass through" (get it? It passes through the unit) and allows the signal to be decoded in the final unit in the data chain. The final unit in the chain can decode the HDCP signal.


It's not difficult to allow decoding on multiple units in a rig, for the manufacturer, especially in a situation like this. An external unit handling Atmos chores can peel off the signal, and a separate amp within it can power as many channels as is desired. The signal can be passed through (I can draw you a picture, with your favorite crayons, if you haven't eaten them already - I'm sure the purple ones are pretty much gone already) to a receiver or pre-amp that already is capable of decoding the normal Dolby and DTS signals, either in lossless or lossy format. It wouldn't matter.


In this way, the format doesn't make outmoded advanced pre-amplifiers from folks like Macintosh, Krell, and others. In case you're not familiar with these names, you'd have to break not only your own piggy bank, but those of all your friends (still have any of those?) just to look at one in the store. Dolby is looking for initial adopters of the format to be well-heeled, discriminating buyers, who generally don't toss state of the art gear off the front porch and run out to buy the latest home theater in a box that has four more speaker outlets.


I own the Pioneer 84tXsi receiver - two of them (use your fingers to count - we don't want to be here all day), neither of which natively decode anything but the lossy formats for DTS and Dolby. Oddly enough, I've been listening to lossless audio on both of these units for about seven years (you still have fingers left over, use your toes if you can't keep up) with amazing sound. I didn't have to replace the receivers.


I know you don't have really high end gear - add Rotel to that list, and you can look up others - that don't need to be discarded because you think the owners are dumb. I only have one request.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

What you may not be aware of is a phenomenon called "pass-through". It's very technical, but exists on most of the less expensive receivers, and allows a signal to "pass through" (get it? It passes through the unit) and allows the signal to be decoded in the final unit in the data chain. The final unit in the chain can decode the HDCP signal.

It's not difficult to allow decoding on multiple units in a rig, for the manufacturer, especially in a situation like this. An external unit handling Atmos chores can peel off the signal, and a separate amp within it can power as many channels as is desired. The signal can be passed through ...to a receiver or pre-amp that already is capable of decoding the normal Dolby and DTS signals, either in lossless or lossy format. It wouldn't matter.

In this way, the format doesn't make outmoded advanced pre-amplifiers from folks like Macintosh, Krell, and others. Dolby is looking for initial adopters of the format to be well-heeled, discriminating buyers, who generally don't toss state of the art gear off the front porch and run out to buy the latest home theater in a box that has four more speaker outlets.

I can see why you'd want to preserve use of a very high-end receiver or pre-pro, but the fact remains in your pass-through model that you're not really using the McIntosh or Krell for anything but switching when playing Dolby Atmos - the 2nd receiver would be doing both the Atmos decoding and presumably at least some of the amplifying, so IMO, it's not a very practical solution and not one that a typical consumer would use (although I don't think a typical consumer would go for Atmos anyway).

What might make more sense for receivers that have at least 11 true amp outputs is to do the Atmos decoding in the Blu-ray player (of course that would have to be a new Blu-ray player) and send that data to the receiver for amplification. Of course THAT only makes sense if Atmos is going to be limited to Blu-ray and/or the larger streaming services that would be part of the BD player functionality. If it's eventually going to be part of a 4K or 8K cable broadcast standard, then it's going to have to be in the receiver or pre-pro and there's no getting around buying a new one.

When you state that Dolby is looking for discriminating, well-heeled buyers, I agree. However those are exactly the buyers who have the will and means to toss out what they have and buy something new. Unfortunately for them, the esoteric high-end manufacturers tend to be relatively slow at implementing new technologies, so IMO, you won't see Atmos in those brands for several years.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I can see why you'd want to preserve use of a very high-end receiver or pre-pro, but the fact remains in your pass-through model that you're not really using the McIntosh or Krell for anything but switching when playing Dolby Atmos - the 2nd receiver would be doing both the Atmos decoding and presumably at least some of the amplifying, so IMO, it's not a very practical solution and not one that a typical consumer would use (although I don't think a typical consumer would go for Atmos anyway).

Actually, I'd add Pioneer Elite, Marantz, and some Denon gear to that list, and there are a number of others. Many are quite adequate to power primary speakers - perhaps excessively so, if reports that Atmos speakers are relatively small and low-powered - so existing sound design need not be altered significantly.


If the sound mixing needs to be altered for Atmos, a pass-through schema would be perfectly adequate, handled by an external unit through HDMI. Where is the inefficiency? If it were not an Atmos mix, the sound would simply pass through the decoder, unaltered, and be decoded by the receiver. If it were, that could be flagged, and affect the mix as it went to the receiver, as PCM. In essence, all decoding would be handled by one unit or the other; it will not be difficult to flag the mix for those purposes.

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

What might make more sense for receivers that have at least 11 true amp outputs is to do the Atmos decoding in the Blu-ray player (of course that would have to be a new Blu-ray player) and send that data to the receiver for amplification. Of course THAT only makes sense if Atmos is going to be limited to Blu-ray and/or the larger streaming services that would be part of the BD player functionality. If it's eventually going to be part of a 4K or 8K cable broadcast standard, then it's going to have to be in the receiver or pre-pro and there's no getting around buying a new one.

Of course their is. The final target is to make the output PCM, to the receiver. I know of the arguments that decoding with the pre-amp or receiver is still not settled, but for consumer purchases, decoded PCM is not a problem. There will always be the issue of which DAC is better, too, I won't even open the door on that argument; I might get hit by a flying chair. The physical location of the decoder is not important; it's the capability of the decoder to do a decent job.


I think that the data will not come in analog inputs to the receiver - I would expect, that as a minimum, any recent HDMI standard could handle the sound chores. If HDMI 2.0 will only be sufficient, that would require an upgrade to that standard, but I can't see why. If the answer is obvious, enlighten me. For audio? I can't see it.


If some grand scheme where HDMI 2.0 is accepting both a video and audio signal, and it can't be received in any other way, Atmos will not succeed as a popular format. I am patiently waiting for a fully backlit monitor/television over 90 inches in size, and I may have a significant wait. 120 inches is technically achievable, right now, with specs close to ideal, but the price is prohibitive. Once it approaches reality, that's where my money is going - I need not repurchase sound gear, if an affordable technical solution can simply be added on.

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

When you state that Dolby is looking for discriminating, well-heeled buyers, I agree. However those are exactly the buyers who have the will and means to toss out what they have and buy something new. Unfortunately for them, the esoteric high-end manufacturers tend to be relatively slow at implementing new technologies, so IMO, you won't see Atmos in those brands for several years.

You won't see it at all. The manufacturers are going broke - Pioneer is selling everything, Sony is hiding in the bushes (they never made great receivers, anyway), and the high end manufacturers have a slow and steady audience of customers still listening to LP's and SACD. Their real hope lies with the audience that prizes a great sound mix for crash-bang movies - the latest Oscar triumph is not likely to be mixed in Atmos. Think about it being a selling point for The King's Speech. Not likely.


Those are middle-class buyers, with wives watching the money, or empty-nesters saving for retirement. They aren't tossing out things that work - they may give older gear to family members, but even they have something by now if they want it. This format needs acceptance, and they'll get it if they make it financially and technically reasonable.


After 3-D was designed not for people to enjoy the format, but to have them reboot all of their gear, it got sidelined (I'm not going to call it a failure - just an example of a niche that the general public hasn't accepted). That was a lesson to everyone. Dolby didn't make this format to watch it molder away; and it has a very real chance of succeeding, if they do it right. I hope it works.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

If the Trinnov Altitude32 processor is anything to go by (since it is the only Dolby certified processor to do the whole thing), more than likely this could be the basic home Atmos layout:

Front: 5 screen speakers (Left/Left Center/Center/Right Center/Right)
Left wall: 5 speaker array
Right wall: 5 speaker array
Rear wall: 5 speaker array
Overheads: 10 speaker array (in left and right pairs)

Two subwoofer outputs
Another two bass management derived outputs

[Lentulus Batiatus]

Originally Posted by Blu-Dog

Giant wall of condescending flame baiting and insulting text.

Not once have I ever seen a Sony, Pioneer, Onkyo, Denon etc add-on device for any new audio format after the Dolby Digital "Ready" phase, and those units where as much as buying a brand new fully capable receiver. Good luck getting your dumb idea past the boards of the major manufactures. Onkyo will feature brand new Atmos enabled receivers and updates to a few current models. No add-on will be designed let alone sent to market to fail.

Next time you feel like being insulting though I will just simply report your post. Your idea is dumb for a vast number of reasons. You might like to have your own add-on unit but that doesn't make it dumb for 99% of the population who'd buy into this niche of a niche product.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Not once have I ever seen a Sony, Pioneer, Onkyo, Denon etc add-on device for any new audio format after the Dolby Digital "Ready" phase, and those units where as much as buying a brand new fully capable receiver. Good luck getting your dumb idea past the boards of the major manufactures. Onkyo will feature brand new Atmos enabled receivers and updates to a few current models. No add-on will be designed let alone sent to market to fail.

I hope you've seen any of the new Blu players from Sony, or any other vendor, since about 2011. All of them have the ability to send decoded Master Audio and DTS-HD, via HDMI, all after BDA dictated no more analog outputs should go on players. This is very old news.


Interesting that you think decoding in an external device is "dumb", it says here in your post. Millions have been made selling such units, not that I got a cut of the proceeds. Are all of those companies run by "dumb" people?

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Next time you feel like being insulting though I will just simply report your post.

Be sure to include your own post when you do. The only thing I hate more than bad information being dispensed in this group, is to have it accompanied by insults. The "dumb all around" comment is what I refer to.


The moderators have little time for that, especially when it is not accompanied by gentle wit.

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Your idea is dumb for a vast number of reasons. You might like to have your own add-on unit but that doesn't make it dumb for 99% of the population who'd buy into this niche of a niche product.

When entering a battle of wits, make sure you're armed. Has that ever happened? You must be very tough, by now. I'm impressed.


I won't predict what 99% of the population will do; I did that with 3-D, and turned out to be right, but was excoriated for it. You may wind up being right, but it will be quite a while before that counts as proof of your intellect. Currently, evidence is scarce.


While you're busy making predictions about what 99% of any population, try these mental exercises (since no on has data yet):

• The percentage of the population that will buy into Dolby Atmos
• The percentage of the population that owns any kind of home theater equipment beyond TV speakers, or a sound bar.
• The percentage of the population that currently owns a 5.1 or 7.1 receiver
• The percentage of those receivers that decode all current codecs (not including Atmos, of course)
• The percentage of those receivers currently decoding via an external device
• The percentage of all receivers costing under $500 when new
• The percentage of receivers costing $500 to $1,200
• The percentage of receivers costing over $1,200
• The percentage of owners for each group willing to toss those receivers to buy a new Atmos unit
• The percentage of all owners that have an environment where Atmos floor based speakers can install Atmos-compatible speakers
• The percentage of all owners who can easily install ceiling-based speakers
• The final number of speakers in the final Atmos standard

That's how bean-counters do it. That's how they design a sales plan - look at the market, what can be sold as a base unit, what can be an affordable add-on, and what can appeal to the high end user - and what the rate of return will be on the manufacturing investment.


That's what they didn't do with 3-D, and why it's now left off the list of must-have equipment for the average buyer. It's also off the list of must-have formats for video release (take a look at what's been released this week in 3-D on the home page of this site. Big fat zero.)


The best option for manufacturers is to look at the user base and figure out what will sell. Do you honestly believe that manufacturers are going to bet the farm on ceiling add-on speakers will be all the rage, to the point of expecting users to discard very expensive (and perfectly functional) receivers in huge quantities? I'm sure they'll make them, but they will also make sure that an alternative is available - just like sound bars are today, or fancy speakers in televisions themselves.


This is not a knock on the format. A sleek amplifier/decoder unit, with a pass-through function, will actually speed up sales - as the ceiling speakers will not require huge power capacity, can be easily added to existing equipment, and need not be large. They can bundle in the correct speakers, for more profit. It's a better overall answer, which you deride as "dumb", without thinking about it.


You sound like someone who is eager to go into fanboy mode. Let's all talk about conspicuous consumption, eagerly tossing out perfectly adequate (and already paid for) gear, to condemn everyone else as a technical Luddite unable to appreciate your exquisite taste in the latest technology. That's what happened to 3-D, the idea that only an enlightened few, in a tight economy, could enjoy the real thing. It was met with a yawn. Make it popular, and accessible, and it will emerge quickly as a standard.


There will always be a place for advancements in technology in our hobby, and the trick is to make them available to all without massive disruption and expense. It takes intelligence to figure out how to do that, and a very simple mind to discard everything that exists to move to the new paradigm. You can either see that, or persist in questioning the intelligence of anyone who doesn't see it like it's been laid out for you, in some advertisement, or brochure, or manufacturer's press release.


Now, run off and report this post, like you've been wounded somehow. The brain is connected to the spine; see if you can grow a pair.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by posthaste

A/V receivers are going to need HDMI 2.0 ports for 4K anyway. When upgrading for that, you'll have the opportunity to get Atmos in the bargain.

Not just that, but presumably HDCP 2.2 as well. None of the receivers or pre-amps coming this year put both together in the right combo for the potential 4k Blu-ray standard. There were too few chipsets available.

Hopefully, next year. One reason I'm skipping this generation.

[Blu-Dog]

Originally Posted by posthaste

A/V receivers are going to need HDMI 2.0 ports for 4K anyway. When upgrading for that, you'll have the opportunity to get Atmos in the bargain.

Not for audio. Dual outputs on a player can feed decoded audio to a legacy receiver, and video directly to the monitor. It can also be passed through the monitor to the receiver.


Nothing needs to be discarded for 4K audio. Video is different. Unless the BDA wants to replicate the 3-D debacle, they'll account for this in the standard, and dual encoded outputs on a player will be a huge "plus" for the upscale market.


I don't understand why there is this huge urge to discard existing gear. Is everyone here working for low-end receiver manufacturers? The idea that the industry can get away with orphaning existing equipment over fashion statements pretty much died in 2010. Witness the buck-eyed desperation in the eyes of manufacturers and the box stores over monitor sales...


I guess the receiver guys are getting freaked out. I have state of the art sound with receivers that pre-date DTS Master Audio and Dolby Master HD, in 7.1, with the addition of two Blu players that cost $100 apiece, from Sony.


It isn't rocket science to get it done.