Dolby Atmos, Auro, and 3D audio thread

[lamont360]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I may be mistaken, but I don't think the slim can do 3D and lossless at the same time.

I have a slim and I'm pretty sure it does do both simultaneously.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by lamont360

I have a slim and I'm pretty sure it does do both simultaneously.

The PS3 does 3D and DTS-HD MA no problem. But 3D and Dolby TrueHD is an issue. It will only play the Dolby Digital 640kbps track.

[jeffster15]

Originally Posted by ClaytonMG

I may be mistaken, but I don't think the slim can do 3D and lossless at the same time.

Originally Posted by BozQ

ClaytonMG is close. :-)
PS3, the fatass, slim and skinny version doesn't do 3D BD with Dolby TrueHD. 3D and DTS-HD MA works fine.

The PS4 should not have this issue however.

Thanks guys, good to know i wasn't doing something wrong haha. Just tried in my PS4 and worked no problem.

[HDTV1080P]

It appears that there is going to be 3 different new surround sound formats that might be introduced in new A/V receivers in 2015+ (at least 2 new formats, possible 3 new formats). In 2014 there are several new A/V receivers being introduced with Dolby Atmos which mainly uses object-based technology. As early as 2015 consumers might see A/V receivers and Blu-ray discs with Auro-3D which is mainly channel-based technology. Both Dolby Atmos and Auro-3D use hybrid technology that uses a combination of channel and object-based technology with different design approaches to sound. A third technology from DTS will be called DTS-UHD format. Auro 13.1 will use up to 8.8Mbps when placed in a 7.1 PCM soundtrack, or less space required when stored in a lossless 7.1 DTS HD-Master audio file or lossless 7.1 Dolby TrueHD file.

According to the October 2014 Widescreen Review magazine article starting on page 44, they believe that Auro-3D has better more natural life like sound quality when compared to Dolby Atmos.

http://www.widescreenreview.com/wsr_issuedetail.php?current

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by HDTV1080P

According to the October 2014 Widescreen Review magazine article starting on page 44, they believe that Auro-3D has better more natural life like sound quality when compared to Dolby Atmos.

Of course they do. And that's only because DTS-UHD has nothing to show yet.
Nearly everyone else prefers Atmos theatrically over Auro.

They also though LaserDisc was better than DVD and HD DVD was better than Blu-ray.


Not to mention the relentless cheerleading of anything DTS and registering the trademark for "Holosonic".


I'm surprised that publication is still out there.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Of course they do. And that's only because DTS-UHD has nothing to show yet.
Nearly everyone else prefers Atmos theatrically over Auro.

They also though LaserDisc was better than DVD and HD DVD was better than Blu-ray.


Not to mention the relentless cheerleading of anything DTS and registering the trademark for "Holosonic".


I'm surprised that publication is still out there.

I think that they registered the term "Holosonic" because DTS has the rights to SRS technology. You might want to peep this article http://www.soundandvision.com/content/atmos-home-huge

You know DTS has something in the works. Also, Audioholics got an opportunity to review both technologies (Atmos and Auro3D) and stated this "Auro-3D put on an incredibly immersive demo proving its prowess for an unparalleled cinematic and musical experience. We are hopeful this format catches on and reaches products at the affordable level for the consumer marketplace." The point being that Auro3D is only available in very high-end prepros now, or you can purchase the codec/vst itself (for $899 I think) and actually it on a PC (but there will be other workarounds for that usage - anything over 8 channels in windows will require an audio interface and ASIO for it to work - if I'm not mistaken).

Auro3D shows a lot of promise especially for PC users.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by HDTV1080P

It appears that there is going to be 3 different new surround sound formats that might be introduced in new A/V receivers in 2015+ (at least 2 new formats, possible 3 new formats). In 2014 there are several new A/V receivers being introduced with Dolby Atmos which mainly uses object-based technology. As early as 2015 consumers might see A/V receivers and Blu-ray discs with Auro-3D which is mainly channel-based technology. Both Dolby Atmos and Auro-3D use hybrid technology that uses a combination of channel and object-based technology with different design approaches to sound. A third technology from DTS will be called DTS-UHD format. Auro 13.1 will use up to 8.8Mbps when placed in a 7.1 PCM soundtrack, or less space required when stored in a lossless 7.1 DTS HD-Master audio file or lossless 7.1 Dolby TrueHD file.

According to the October 2014 Widescreen Review magazine article starting on page 44, they believe that Auro-3D has better more natural life like sound quality when compared to Dolby Atmos.

http://www.widescreenreview.com/wsr_issuedetail.php?current

Most of the articles I've read prefer Auro3D as well. However the Auro3D is found in Datasat, Trinnov, and Storm Audio to name a few...all of them are 5 figure processors.

[prerich]

Currently the Auro3D Codec/decoder is available only in .aax format (Avid plugin) however vst support is planned before the end of the year. This codec/decoder would be placed inside a program such as JRiver or any other program with the ability to handle vst plugins. Using the plugin would give the user Auro3D decoding ability.

I've had a lot of fun with .vst files and JRiver. Just to name a few of the vst files that use, I currently have Math Audio Room EQ ...LOVE IT! I also have Izotope Ozone 5 - and i'll upgrade it to 6...Love it also. I have vst plugins that crosstalk cancellation, phase, you name it ... an entire host!!! I'd get an Auro3D vst - but I'd wait for the price to come down.

[prerich]

Fyi, Warner Brothers, Disney, and Dreamworks have officially adopted Auro 11.2 from Barco. Not saying that this can't change.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by prerich

Fyi, Warner Brothers, Disney, and Dreamworks have officially adopted Auro 11.2 from Barco. Not saying that this can't change.

For the home?

Theatrically all studios have released in Dolby Atmos.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

For the home?

Theatrically all studios have released in Dolby Atmos.

Well I really don't know how to take it - on the Auro3D page under consumer it list about 100 titles that currently have Auro3D (but is that smoke screen - saying that the commercial theaters have it - or the BD's? Hmmm?).

I will say that Auro3D is much easier to implement, and when DTS comes out with theirs - Dolby may be left in the dust (due to the open source nature of the DTS version and Auro not being necessarily object based - although it can be). Also - it seems that DTS and Auro3D have formed an alliance.

Currently DTS-HD MA reigns supreme on Blu-ray. I'm thinking once they come out with their version - it will still reign supreme, and Auro3D being a side track because of its easy implementation.

The first to market is not always the winner ... just ask HD-DVD.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by prerich

Well I really don't know how to take it - on the Auro3D page under consumer it list about 100 titles that currently have Auro3D (but is that smoke screen - saying that the commercial theaters have it - or the BD's? Hmmm?).

Commercial theaters. There are a few "special interest" music discs out there, nothing more. No studio support. Paramount, Warner and Lionsgate have scheduled Dolby Atmos releases on Blu-ray this year.

I will say that Auro3D is much easier to implement, and when DTS comes out with theirs - Dolby may be left in the dust (due to the open source nature of the DTS version and Auro not being necessarily object based - although it can be). Also - it seems that DTS and Auro3D have formed an alliance.

If it was so easy to implement all studios would be using it, but they are not. They are using Atmos. For the home it's even harder because people will not install 2 levels of speakers: much easier to put them on the ceiling or bounce them off the ceiling.

Currently DTS-HD MA reigns supreme on Blu-ray. I'm thinking once they come out with their version - it will still reign supreme, and Auro3D being a side track because of its easy implementation.

See above for "ease". And Dolby reigned supreme on DVD. The tools for Atmos are out there and the objects can translate directly to the home from the theater, and it's already in the hands of all studios. DTS needs new tools. Auro & DTS aren't compatible with Atmos objects and need a separate mix done.

[Canada]

Is there any chance we will see movies be retro-fitted into Dolby Atmos the same way we saw stereo get retro-fitted for 5.1?

[AVinstallGuy]

I have heard the same theatrical feature played in 5.1 7.1 Auro 11.1 and Dolby Atmos. All were played on excellent installations that were very carefully calibrated. The feature was "Rise of the Guardians".

I heard the 7.1 first and was very impressed with the mix. The use of pans around the ring of 7 channels worked so well, I really wondered how much Auro or Atmos could bring to it. The next time I heard it was in Auro, and I specifically listened for certain scenes where the 7.1 had excellent imaging. I was fairly far back in the theatre, and yet, I never heard anything pan behind me, it was in front or to the sides and a few places I heard it pan over. The height difference between the low and high in all 5 positions was really too small to make much effect. I could not say it sounded bad, in fact it did sound great, very good match to the audio quality of the 7.1, and it certainly had the overhead sound in a few key scenes, but the lack of the pan back behind me made it seem odd. I would like to hear their 13.1 and see if that works any better. Then i heard it in 5.1, I just ducked in to catch a few scenes for comparison. In an odd twist, it was louder than the Auro room, and even seemed a little bass heavy, but again, very good still, and noone hearing this room would ever complain of poor sound in any way, but it was quite obvious in several scenes that it was lacking the feeling of space that both the 7.1 and Auro 11.1 were able to convey. I would say, in this mix, the Auro was about an equal step up from the 5.1 as the 7.1 was. They both added dimension and space, but in different directions.

Then I heard it in Dolby Atmos, at a very well equipped theatre. WOW!! right form the opening title sequence, there were subtle sounds that were totally missed in the channel based versions. The sound of wind, icicles, voices in the distance, just little things you hear when you walk outside, were all there. Not distracting at all. Quite the opposite, the realism pulls you in to what is happening on the screen. You feel like you are there. In several scenes, they even had the voices of the main characters placed exactly where that person is, even when off the screen. The sounds being able to move along the side walls just brought scenes to life like none of the other presentations. And this was not a big heavy object driven mix, just a few used carefully to convey the directors intent. Of course, they did go a bit more crazy with the objects in a few scenes. The Tooth Fairy's castle scene with Pitch, jumping from place to place, with his voice coming from his new location, hop after hop, sure comes to mind. There was also the slide across and ice covered wire. In Auro, it was overhead, but didn't really move. In Atmos, he slid across the wire, from the right back corner of the room to left of center screen. Icicles dropping off as he went across over your head.

True object audio can do so much more than a channel based system, there is no real comparison. If the speakers in a room end up in close to the exact positions that they are on the dub stage, then it can translate pretty well on a fixed channel setup, but to really work, this needs to be very tightly controlled. All the channels must be used and in the correct relative places.

With Object based sound, it is rendered on the fly to whatever speakers are really there. Even the consumer version of Dolby Atmos has this ability. The Denon W5200X has several choices of speaker locations. You can have it pan through wide or even front heights. The only limitation is that it will only ever have 11 full range speakers active at any given time. And even that requires an external 2 channel amp. As much as I want this in my room now, I will have to wait for a box that can do 13 full range speakers. I want 9.2.4 with L C R and 2 front wides, 4 surrounds, and 4 overheads. I am also hoping for the .2 subs to be able to be a front and rear so I can bass manage the surround bass behind me separate from the front LFE/bass management. My current 7.1 setup has 2 speakers on each side wall now, and I would hate to pair them.

Dolby Atmos done right is something that needs to be experienced first hand to really see what it can do. Transformers sounded good, but is really not a good track to show off the system. In my ears, "Dolphin Tale 2" was a much better use of the track. Very subtle, but also accurate to what you would be hearing if you were really there. Pan the movie all you like, but if you listen to it played properly in Atmos, you will find yourself pulled right into the scene with the actors. The outdoor night scene with the crickets was just amazing. The scenes walking on the dock, also had the sounds of the world all around. The overhead speakers add to these subtle ambient sounds, but not by screaming "Hey, look up!" but instead just completing the audio image. Jacking up levels to get more "Atmos Effect" would be a huge mistake. Proper balance is key to making it work it's best on all scenes.

I enjoy loud effects when they are done well, but so many are just plain annoying lately. Dolby Atmos has more sound level capability than most other systems could ever dream of producing, but that power is not there to make it loud, but more to make it accurate in any use. averaged over the MLP, Cinema Dolby Atmos is calibrated to the same 85 db C reference that has been used since 1975. In 5.1 and 7.1, this level is for left, center, and right. The surrounds in both systems are referenced at 82 db C for each group. LS and RS in a 5.1 or LSS, RSS, BSL, and BSR in 7.1 When a 7.1 system plays a 5.1 track, the 2 groups on each side are double fed, but attenuated to again give just 82 db C total.

In Dolby Atmos, they made a huge decision to raise the reference level of the surrounds to 85 db C for each single surround speaker. 3 db may not sound like much, but that is going from as many as 8 (maybe more) speakers before to just 1 single speaker. The demand is huge. Since this is a -20 dbsf signal, in theory, that could mean a peak level of 105 db, and that is what the screens and surround arrays are designed for, but for the sake of reality, each speaker only needs to be able to do 99 db by itself to pass Atmos spec. If director needs more than 99 db, he needs to fatten out the object to hit a few speakers.

The spec for the front mail LFE has not changes either. It is +10 db over center channel mid range level in the active range between 20 and 125 hz. The back LFE speakers do not have the 10 db addition. They only need to keep up with the bass fill of the surrounds it is managing. It can still be quite a demand if 10 surrounds at 95 db each all manage to a single back sub, it does need to be pretty robust to keep up. Usually just 1/3 or less of the front LFE is needed on each of a pair of back subs. The cross point into the back subs is chosen by where the surround speakers start to fall off.

I can't wait to start installing more home systems. So far just 2 very basic setups with Denon W5200X AVR's. Be aware, the firmware update took over 40 minutes on a cable modem at over 10 Mbps.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Canada

Is there any chance we will see movies be retro-fitted into Dolby Atmos the same way we saw stereo get retro-fitted for 5.1?

Die Hard (1988) and Chicago (2002) have already been remixed into Dolby Atmos as tests.


As the format grows it will probably happen, just as older films were remixed and encoded into Dolby Digital on LaserDisc.

[Badas]

Watched:



Dolby Atmos is insane for Home Theater use. I was far more impressed than I thought I was going to be. Right from the stars on the Paramount symbol everything seemed to float in the room. Family was buzzing out as well.

I did extensive testing after the film between Atmos and 7.1 sound. I will edit this post with a link to a mini review tomorrow. I need to collect my thoughts.
Amazing night. Never had a film experience like this before.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by prerich

Fyi, Warner Brothers, Disney, and Dreamworks have officially adopted Auro 11.2 from Barco. Not saying that this can't change.

I can accept Dreamworks but not Warner Bros and Disney. WB and Disney has no movies released in Auro 11.1 theatrically, why would they release Auro Blu-ray?

If there are two studios I can easily believe, it's Dreamworks and Sony. And to a certain extent, Paramount. But they're quite supportive of Dolby Atmos already.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by prerich

Well I really don't know how to take it - on the Auro3D page under consumer it list about 100 titles that currently have Auro3D (but is that smoke screen - saying that the commercial theaters have it - or the BD's? Hmmm?).

I will say that Auro3D is much easier to implement, and when DTS comes out with theirs - Dolby may be left in the dust (due to the open source nature of the DTS version and Auro not being necessarily object based - although it can be). Also - it seems that DTS and Auro3D have formed an alliance.

Currently DTS-HD MA reigns supreme on Blu-ray. I'm thinking once they come out with their version - it will still reign supreme, and Auro3D being a side track because of its easy implementation.

The first to market is not always the winner ... just ask HD-DVD.

There are barely even 50 Hollywood titles in Auro 11.1. Warner and Disney don't even employ this format.

Implementing Atmos vs Auro in cinemas is a draw. Both has its challenges in setting up the speakers. But if I'd venture a guess on the cost of setting up, I'd say Auro is more expensive. Because it requires two additional layers of speakers placement for the soundtrack to be effective. While Dolby Atmos requires at minimum two arrays of overhead speakers and calibration and it's set. There's nothing for me to judge about DTS. It's time for them to stop talking and show something.

At the home front, Atmos has a clear advantage. Because implementing Auro 9.1 and above is a very costly affair. You'd have to find a way to install height channel speakers, while Dolby has already came up with practical solutions for eager enthusiasts an alternative should they want to experience Atmos at home.

Now the upfiring speakers are not necessarily the best solution or will project a good experience, but at least there's a cost effective alternative to penetrate the home market. A large reason why Blu-ray had an edge was because Sony crammed a Blu-ray drive into every PlayStation 3 console even if people didn't know if they wanted or needed it. And of course, it's not the best Blu-ray player today, it was quite instrumental in winning the HD format Wars. Likewise here, we have the Onkyo HT-S7700. A 5.1.2 HTIB. The upfiring speakers are integrated with the front channel speakers. So for entry level home theater owners, they can pick a low cost model such as this with little hassle.

And we have about four Blu-rays coming with Dolby Atmos. We have Transformers, Hercules is next, Ninja Turtles, Step Up All In, Expendables 3, more to come. And where's Auro? None.

They have a couple of music Blu-rays in that format, sure. But where's the push for Hollywood titles? Where's the receivers? Where's the speakers? They're effectively ready to penetrate home theater market for a good two years now but they've decided to sit on their ass until now, and Dolby has clearly overtaken them.

If Dolby Atmos Comes out victorious, Barco have only themselves to blame. They had the edge but they did nothing for too long.

EDIT: And one other thing. On the production side of things, if you truly understood how Dolby Atmos works, then you'd know that it makes a hell lot more sense to finish the mix in Atmos and then render out in whichever channel based format it requires. From 2.0, to 5.1, 7.1, 11.1, 13.1, what you name it, Dolby Atmos can do it.

Even if DTS finally unleashes its open source object based format, so what? If the cinemas don't install the speakers setup, no sane sound department will want to work twice on a format that no cinemas will present. DTS has to come up with something so extraordinary to budge Dolby out of its way. Good luck to them.

[prerich]

Originally Posted by BozQ

There are barely even 50 Hollywood titles in Auro 11.1. Warner and Disney don't even employ this format.

Implementing Atmos vs Auro in cinemas is a draw. Both has its challenges in setting up the speakers. But if I'd venture a guess on the cost of setting up, I'd say Auro is more expensive. Because it requires two additional layers of speakers placement for the soundtrack to be effective. While Dolby Atmos requires at minimum two arrays of overhead speakers and calibration and it's set. There's nothing for me to judge about DTS. It's time for them to stop talking and show something.

At the home front, Atmos has a clear advantage. Because implementing Auro 9.1 and above is a very costly affair. You'd have to find a way to install height channel speakers, while Dolby has already came up with practical solutions for eager enthusiasts an alternative should they want to experience Atmos at home.

Now the upfiring speakers are not necessarily the best solution or will project a good experience, but at least there's a cost effective alternative to penetrate the home market. A large reason why Blu-ray had an edge was because Sony crammed a Blu-ray drive into every PlayStation 3 console even if people didn't know if they wanted or needed it. And of course, it's not the best Blu-ray player today, it was quite instrumental in winning the HD format Wars. Likewise here, we have the Onkyo HT-S7700. A 5.1.2 HTIB. The upfiring speakers are integrated with the front channel speakers. So for entry level home theater owners, they can pick a low cost model such as this with little hassle.

And we have about four Blu-rays coming with Dolby Atmos. We have Transformers, Hercules is next, Ninja Turtles, Step Up All In, Expendables 3, more to come. And where's Auro? None.

They have a couple of music Blu-rays in that format, sure. But where's the push for Hollywood titles? Where's the receivers? Where's the speakers? They're effectively ready to penetrate home theater market for a good two years now but they've decided to sit on their ass until now, and Dolby has clearly overtaken them.

If Dolby Atmos Comes out victorious, Barco have only themselves to blame. They had the edge but they did nothing for too long.

EDIT: And one other thing. On the production side of things, if you truly understood how Dolby Atmos works, then you'd know that it makes a hell lot more sense to finish the mix in Atmos and then render out in whichever channel based format it requires. From 2.0, to 5.1, 7.1, 11.1, 13.1, what you name it, Dolby Atmos can do it.

Even if DTS finally unleashes its open source object based format, so what? If the cinemas don't install the speakers setup, no sane sound department will want to work twice on a format that no cinemas will present. DTS has to come up with something so extraordinary to budge Dolby out of its way. Good luck to them.

Wasn't Oz the Great and Powerful released in Auro3d...Isn't that a Disney movie? I was questioning if Auro had released any content yet - and my question was answered by PeterTHX - it was marketing.

However the entire HD-DVD debacle is very similar to what we have going on here. HD-DVD was the first to market, seemed like it was going to win for a moment, but then what happened - the PS3 pushed BD over the top (I'm not a PS fan - never was - never will be - Love BD though). I'm just looking at the Auro3D site and I'm seeing partnerships with Apple, and several other companies. I see apps being made - and other ways to enjoy Auro3D. I'm not really sold on Atmos yet. I'm not wishing for it's death mind you. However buying yet another piece of gear doesn't really turn my head at this stage in the game. Giving me an app, vst, or partnering with someone like Cyberlink, or Corel - that would warm me up to the whole Atmos thing. Auro3D seems like its poised and ready to partner not only with hardware suppliers and studios, but with decoding and producing software as well.

[Mr.Twinks]

This has probably been asked before but are first Gen AVRs example Denon's 5200X Atmos AVR, can it be upgraded through firmware for Auro as well?