Dolby Atmos coming soon for home use

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Still the majority of the current, and future theatrical movies are going to be in 5.1, and just a handful of releases will be in Dolby Atmos, (the way it is now). Dolby Atmos is featured only in selected theaters across the country, so how could Dolby Atmos be successful in the home theater market, when approximately 75% of the general population worldwide has never heard it, or don't know anything about Dolby Atmos? Certain people who have heard Dolby Atmos, have stated, they were not that impress with it.

It really depends on how the theater is calibrated and how well the sound engineers utilized the object tools available. Some are better than others, just like any other soundtrack.

Gravity was (and still is) the gold standard by which all others should emulate and/or build from. They REALLY went to town on that mix. It was amazing. Too bad the movie was... meh.

[blurayjunkie]

Sorry wrong thread please delete

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Still the majority of the current, and future theatrical movies are going to be in 5.1, and just a handful of releases will be in Dolby Atmos, (the way it is now). Dolby Atmos is featured only in selected theaters across the country, so how could Dolby Atmos be successful in the home theater market, when approximately 75% of the general population worldwide has never heard it, or don't know anything about Dolby Atmos? Certain people who have heard Dolby Atmos, have stated, they were not that impress with it.

Pretty much every major release is getting an Atmos mix.
When Dolby Digital first came home in 1995 it was limited to LaserDisc. But even then they remixed and re-released catalog titles in the format.


I've read more information and Atmos will not be limited to Blu-ray.


Atmos information can apparently be piggybacked into every Dolby format, including Dolby Digital (HDTV) and Dolby Digital Plus (streaming: Netflix/Vudu/etc).


There will be television shows in Atmos!

[youngtiffani]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

It really depends on how the theater is calibrated and how well the sound engineers utilized the object tools available. Some are better than others, just like any other soundtrack.

Gravity was (and still is) the gold standard by which all others should emulate and/or build from. They REALLY went to town on that mix. It was amazing. Too bad the movie was... meh.

Atmos made this movie worth the price of admission IMO.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

DTS cannot be far behind with their own DTS-UHD announcements.

How the hell did I miss this for so long? I just learned that DTS-UHD is based off the previously announced DTS MDA pitch a couple of years ago. Thanks for that heads up!

Originally Posted by yellowcakeuf6

Datasat (DTS) has already equipped their cinema and home processors with Auro-3D w/ at least 11.1 channel capability.

True. But Auro 3D BD is limited to 9.1 so far and as far as I know, there's only two audio only Blu-rays that uses this. And it's really nothing more than a DTS-HD encoded 5.1 soundtrack which allows you to Matrix up to 9.1. The four additional channels are the satellite height channels. No known feature films are released in this format.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

That's not object surround. The DTS-UHD codec, which based off DTS MDA, is a totally different animal from Auro3D (considered to be old-school technology now that objects are taking over) and more akin to Atmos. Plus, Datasat's processor is waaaaaaaaaay outside the price range of most mere mortals.

Thank you so much for that heads up. I never knew DTS-UHD was announced this year. Gonna keep tabs on this.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Well, could be. Atmos can control up to 62.2 outputs. The base channel bed is 9.1. That's why metadata controlled objects can help expand the soundfield without requiring a full 64 channels. It does save some space, and allows for an easier, automated fold-down for smaller systems.

The maximum is actually 61.3 surround. The Dolby Atmos cinema here in Singapore uses this configuration. Three subwoofers, one behind the screen, and two surround subs at the back of the hall.

The base channel bed can either be 5.1, 7.1 or 9.1. The latter utilizing two height channels. However, as far as I know, most if not all of the Atmos mix uses a 7.1 bed. Hopefully, with this announcement, we can start to see 9.1 beds.

Originally Posted by pentatonic

To the Mods!

How come the merged threads ended up it the BD movies sections. This being new tech not yet available on BD, shouldn't it in the BD tech section in upcoming tech news??

Yes! Why isn't this in the BD tech forum?

Originally Posted by Poya

Is it possible for a receiver to have both DTS-UHD and Atmos capabilities in case certain BDs might favor one format over the other?

I doubt it. But nothing is impossible. You just have to pay a lot of money for it.

Originally Posted by Mr.Twinks

I wonder if DTS is waiting for CEDIA or wait to see how this pans out? What about Auro3D sound as well?

Didn't we have Auro 3D at home for a while now? We have Auro 3D encoded BD, but it's only limited to some music BDs and in 9.1 only.

Originally Posted by Poya

They said that 7.1.4 is the gold standard, yet there's mention of 9.1.2, which technically, should be superior. What's up with that?

And even more, why not go 11.4.4? It should be possible, right?

Because current receivers are only limited to 12 channel audio now? I think Dolby's concern now is to roll out Dolby Atmos with current available hardware.

I think 7.1.4 should be the optimum configuration. 9.1.2 setup sacrifices two height channels for FwL and FwR channels. 7.1.4 should provide users with a more balanced and enveloping experience.

EDIT: Cleaned up some formatting issues.

[BozQ]

I should also add one other thing. Until it's further clarified, I think Dolby Atmos content on Blu-ray will be lossy and not lossless, and encoded with Dolby Digital Plus.

I honestly don't see how we can have an object based Metadata soundtrack on Blu-ray without revamping the specs, but with Dolby Digital Plus, we might have some limited content.

According to the white paper, it allows up to 16 channels or 15.1 of audio.

Of course, this is purely my guess and I might be wrong here. I am keeping a very close eye on this.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by BozQ

Because current receivers are only limited to 12 channel audio now? I think Dolby's concern now is to roll out Dolby Atmos with current available hardware.

I think 7.1.4 should be the optimum configuration. 9.1.2 setup sacrifices two height channels for FwL and FwR channels. 7.1.4 should provide users with a more balanced and enveloping experience.

Fair enough, but can you add 3 more subwoofers? The two high-end onkyo receivers can go up to 4 subwoofers.

Plus, which is better: Preamp PR-SC5530 or Receiver TX-NR3030?

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by Poya

Fair enough, but can you add 3 more subwoofers? The two high-end onkyo receivers can go up to 4 subwoofers.

According to the Dolby Atmos White paper, the cinema version optionally allows for up to 3 channels of LFE. And optimally, it's either one or three subs to have a balanced LFE in the soundtrack.

However, having more than two subs in any home theater is overkill. One should suffice for most.

[PowellPressburger]

Originally Posted by BozQ

I should also add one other thing. Until it's further clarified, I think Dolby Atmos content on Blu-ray will be lossy and not lossless, and encoded with Dolby Digital Plus.

Is it just me or does this seem like a letdown? I mean if they can't do it uncompressed then why bother? Seems like a lot of work just to add some channels of overhead compressed audio.

[Kris Deering]

Originally Posted by BozQ

According to the Dolby Atmos White paper, the cinema version optionally allows for up to 3 channels of LFE. And optimally, it's either one or three subs to have a balanced LFE in the soundtrack.

However, having more than two subs in any home theater is overkill. One should suffice for most.

Having one sub is not ideal for home theater. Depending on the sub it may be enough output for a single room (but more times than not you're pushing the sub too hard) but the benefits of two subs has more to do with evening the response across multiple seats and provided headroom to keep the subs from driving into distortion. There are PLENTY of white papers on this that show definitively why having one sub in a room is less than ideal (though far better than no subs!). Ultimately two is far better than one, 3 isn't much better than two and four is the ideal with more than four being usually unnecessary. Again, all has to do with in room response (peaks and valleys) and little to do with output.

[Batmon77]

So in a perfect world, we will get ATMOS Remastered Godfather, Jaws, Taxi Driver, and Star Wars...etc??????

Or will this be another "hot" for 5 years mode that joins NeoX and Logic ProII?

[Poya]

Originally Posted by Batmon77

So in a perfect world, we will get ATMOS Remastered Godfather, Jaws, Taxi Driver, and Star Wars...etc??????

Or will this be another "hot" for 5 years mode that joins NeoX and Logic ProII?

Both were simply matrix decoders (NeoX had 2 BDs but that's it). Atmos is a legit sound format.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

Is it just me or does this seem like a letdown? I mean if they can't do it uncompressed then why bother? Seems like a lot of work just to add some channels of overhead compressed audio.

I have a hunch it will be presented using the Dolby TrueHD lossless codec.

Also have a sneaking suspicion that there really aren't that many objects being added to the channel bed. Not 128, surely.

Perhaps in their zeal to be first, Dolby compromised too much with the manufacturers who didn't want to use more powerful DSP engines and also because they wanted the tracks on today's Blu-ray discs. They didn't wait for higher capacity formats.

I'm disappointed they didn't start out with a 9.1+4 configuration so they could have dual pairs of side surrounds (side surrounds and front wide surrounds) along with the four ceilings. That way there would have been a speaker array for more precise pan-throughs of objects.

[Kirk Out]

http://www.businesswire.com/news/hom...y-Atmos-Andrew

[kpkelley]

[Kirk Out]

well looks like i just found my next speaker setup and receiver

[slimdude]

Regardless of various specs and configurations, I don't necessarily need to hear my movies in Dolby Atmos for me to enjoy them. To each its own!

[kenoh]

Does Dolby Atmos support up to 22.1 channels like the Ultra HD 8k spec? Is it 11.1 channels?

Denon has a receiver with 13.1 channels, so that's why I'm asking.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by kenoh

Does Dolby Atmos support up to 22.1 channels like the Ultra HD 8k spec? Is it 11.1 channels?

Denon has a receiver with 13.1 channels, so that's why I'm asking.

Theatrically, they can have up to 64 speakers(62.2). I'm not sure about the in-home spec. Two of the three pioneer receivers above are 9.2, while the other is 7.2.

[BozQ]

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

Is it just me or does this seem like a letdown? I mean if they can't do it uncompressed then why bother? Seems like a lot of work just to add some channels of overhead compressed audio.

Pleas, please, please. Let me reiterate something, I am just guessing it will be lossy. Until Dolby provides further details or until the actual product is out, I am just guessing. Why lossy? Because I'd imagine something as ambitious as this would require a significant amount of storage and lossless would take up a lot of space. Lossy might be a compromise for home video. Again, for the third time, I'm guessing.

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

I have a hunch it will be presented using the Dolby TrueHD lossless codec.

Also have a sneaking suspicion that there really aren't that many objects being added to the channel bed. Not 128, surely.

Perhaps in their zeal to be first, Dolby compromised too much with the manufacturers who didn't want to use more powerful DSP engines and also because they wanted the tracks on today's Blu-ray discs. They didn't wait for higher capacity formats.

I'm disappointed they didn't start out with a 9.1+4 configuration so they could have dual pairs of side surrounds (side surrounds and front wide surrounds) along with the four ceilings. That way there would have been a speaker array for more precise pan-throughs of objects.

Maybe for now, we remain with 12 channels. If the home video version of Dolby Atmos is as versatile as its cinema counterpart, then there's no stopping them from pushing for more channels.

But at the very least, this is a good step forward. We've heard nothing from DTS-MDA / DTS-UHD since they were announced and Barco Auro has had pathetic support on Blu-ray despite being in the market for a while. As long as the first feature film is released on Blu-ray with Dolby Atmos, we're well on our way to the future. Even if it's not fully realized now, any next generation format can benefit from an enhanced version of this. Think positive, my friend! :-)

Originally Posted by slimdude

Regardless of various specs and configurations, I don't necessarily need to hear my movies in Dolby Atmos for me to enjoy them. To each its own!

Well, thank you.