Dolby Atmos dilemma: 7.1.2 or 5.1.4?

[bigboss]

I've been reading more about Atmos. Basically, it's important for 7 speakers to be at ear level and the Atmos speakers in the ceiling. It's the difference in height that creates the Atmos experience. My original plan was to have a 7.1.2 system with in-wall speakers for fronts and centre and in-ceiling speakers for the rest.

I've now decided to go for in-wall speakers for surrounds as well, and Atmos for the ceiling.

Here's my dilemma:

- Ideally, I should go for a 7.1.4 setup, which means an upgrade from Yamaha RX-A2040 to 3040, an additional stereo amplifier as well as 2 additional speakers, which is a significant cost increase.

- In order to stay with a 9-speaker system without disturbing my budget, I can either go for 7.1.2 or 5.1.4. Which one is better?

 

[simonlewis]

I would go for quality over quantity and if we are voteing then i would vote for 5.1.4, i think juggling a stereo amp and a home cinema amp would be too complicated and take the enjoyment away, but thats just my thoughts.

 

[macdiddy]

Sorry bigboss, in my opinion I think you should go with the 7.1.4 option, I know this won't go down well with her indoors *secret* and incurs additional costs but as you are looking to install a Dolby Atmos system in your new cinema room and the whole idea of the Atmos format is to create a more immersive sound experience which to me means more speakers ( like the original cinema version ).

In the end it's up to you but maybe think about adding extra runs of speaker cable just in case you change your mind later on after your new room is finished.

*bye*

 

[bigboss]

Yes, I'll put some speaker cables in, just in case. It'll cost me an additional £1200 just to add 2 extra speakers for 7.1.4. I think I'll go for a 5.1.4 as Simon suggests for now.

Cheers! *drinks*

 

[Glacialpath]

Go with the 5.1.4 as i'm thinking if you could get the 7.1.4 amp and lay the speaker cable for the SRBs then add the SRBs when the budget allows.

I'm guessing though the price difference is such that adding the SRBs at a later date is not much different than getting 7.1.4 straight off if the price between the amps is the greater difference.

I thought you were going for .2 and not .4. Are you convinced now after reading more that .4 is more woth while?

Glad you decided on the in wall speakers for the surrounds in the end.

We're counting on you to get it right and be the talk of the town.

 

[bigboss]

Thanks! Yes, I was thinking of .2 initially as all my surrounds were meant to be ceiling speakers as well, and it was getting crowded. With the surrounds going in the wall, I can now think of .4.

Also, I was concentrating more on a 7.1 system and the AVR has only 9 channels. But reading more about Atmos, I think 5.1.4 is better than 7.1.2.

 

[Glacialpath]

So the thinking is to go with 4 up top to give you better front/behind definition and with the surrounds slightly behind you too firing at each other or towards the ears?

I suppose I could read up about it my self or as you seem to have read so much I can ask you lol

Does having lets call them "Top" speakers, mean your surrounds can come down to ear height as they are not needed for sounds above you even though I'm sure any sounds mixed above you will be slightly in the surrounds?

Ultimately I would imagine wanting 7.2.4. If in 5 years you really want the SRBs are you putting any trunking in for a future update.

I guess that would be easier than adding a sacond pair up top? You will already have those.

 

[bigboss]

So the thinking is to go with 4 up top to give you better front/behind definition and with the surrounds slightly behind you too firing at each other or towards the ears?

Yes. The surrounds will come down to the same height as fronts (just above ear level), either at the rear wall firing straight in front of the room, or on the sides firing at each other. The position will depend on what's going to be easier to install, i.e, which wall has a cavity behind.

Does having lets call them "Top" speakers, mean your surrounds can come down to ear height as they are not needed for sounds above you even though I'm sure any sounds mixed above you will be slightly in the surrounds?

We're still waiting on Transformers to be released, so some reviews of Atmos in a home start surfacing. The idea is having 2 different planes of sound for a proper Atmos effect. The fronts and surrounds at the same level will be one plane, and the ceiling speakers for Atmos will be another plane.

Ultimately I would imagine wanting 7.2.4. If in 5 years you really want the SRBs are you putting any trunking in for a future update.

In my case, 7.1.4 will be enough. As I've got KK DXD-808 subwoofer, I can always buy another 1-3 and stack them up! I'll only leave a couple of speaker cables in the pelmet ceiling. Adding the speakers will probably need a bit of plastering, but it shouldn't be too bad, as the only bit to be plastered will be coming down from the pelmet ceiling to the speakers.

I guess that would be easier than adding a sacond pair up top? You will already have those.

It won't, but after speaking to a few people, the consensus seems to be that extra pair of Dolby Atmos speakers will give better effect than having rear surrounds in addition to side surrounds.

 

[Son_of_SJ]

Bigboss, have you seen HCC magazine, Xmas 2014 issue, number 241? (The previous issue had a review of the Onkyo TX-NR838 Dolby Atmos receiver.) This new issue has reviews of the Pioneer LX88 and Denon X41000W receivers. However, the item of most interest here is the three-page review of the Transformers: Age of Extinction Blu-Ray, comparing its Dolby Atmos mix in 5.1.2 configuration with a conventional 7.1 array with rear-back channels. Not all of the differences are necessarily in the new format's favour. The article concludes:

"Used creatively, it (Dolby Atmos) conjures up a sonic environment unlike any we've heard in the home before, despite multiple attempts by post-processing codecs like Audyssey DSX. But conversely, Atmos doesn't render 7.1 redundant, and in several cases the latter mix can actually sound better!"

I personally am in the unusual situation of having an existing 11-channel (with front heights, front wides and surround back speakers) Audyssey DSX setup in the parlour (to which I seldom listen except when I have guests), because I make do with either the 8.1 system in the kitchen or my 7.2 system in my bedroom. So when I do listen to the 11.1 system in the parlour, I'm usually pretty impressed. So for me, I will want to compare a 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos arrangement with my existing 11.1 system. I'm willing to be convinced, but I will have to be convinced.

You will not be surprised that I would urge you to the full 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos system, with the Yamaha RX-A3040 receiver! And to counteract what Simonlewis said in post 2 above, I really didn't find it complicated to add an extra stereo amplifier to create an 11-channel array using two of the 11 pre-outs of my nine-channel Denon AVR-4810 receiver, as you would have to do with an extra stereo amplfier adding to the nine-channel (but 11-channel pre-out) Yamaha A3040. And this additional stereo ampflifier certainly doesn't have to be a new or expensive top-grade model, I got my extra stereo amplifier (a very solid Sony TA-FB930R) for £55 on eBay!

Lastly, why would an extra pair of ceiling speakers cost you £1,200??? Are they gold-plated? My fairly big "floorstanding" Eltax S-35 speakers cost me only about £350 ..... but that's quality over quantity I guess....

 

[his dudeness]

av forums review prefared the 5.1,4 set up https://www.avforums.com/review/marantz-sr7009-av-dolby-atmos-receiver-review.10854

 

[Son_of_SJ]

av forums review preferred the 5.1.4 set up https://www.avforums.com/review/marantz-sr7009-av-dolby-atmos-receiver-r...

Thanks for this, his dudeness. And for £600 less than Yamaha RX-A3040, the Marantz will do Dolby Atmos 7.1.4 (if you add an extra stereo amplifier), as well as Audyssey DSX, DTS Neo:X and (soon) Auro3D ......

 

[bigboss]

Lastly, why would an extra pair of ceiling speakers cost you £1,200??? Are they gold-plated? My fairly big "floorstanding" Eltax S-35 speakers cost me only about £350 ..... but that's quality over quantity I guess....

Cost of upgrading from 2040 to 3040 + 2 speakers + stereo amplifier + a 2.0 wall plate + extra installation.

I am not going to compromise on the AV receiver. Yamaha has served me well over the years, and I prefer its sound to Marantz, Onkyo and Pioneer. If Yamaha comes up with true 11.2 channel receiver next year.....maybe I'll add an additional pair of speakers.

 

[bigboss]

av forums review preferred the 5.1.4 set up https://www.avforums.com/review/marantz-sr7009-av-dolby-atmos-receiver-r...

Thanks for this, his dudeness. And for £600 less than Yamaha RX-A3040, the Marantz will do Dolby Atmos 7.1.4 (if you add an extra stereo amplifier), as well as Audyssey DSX, DTS Neo:X and (soon) Auro3D ......

The Marantz doesn't have extra pre-outs to drive the 2 fronts separately via stereo amplifier, unlike Yamaha RX-A3040.

 

[bigboss]

av forums review prefared the 5.1,4 set up https://www.avforums.com/review/marantz-sr7009-av-dolby-atmos-receiver-r...

*drinks*

So 5.1.4 is indeed better than 7.1.2!!

 

[Frank Harvey]

This thread can be used as good info for other future Atmos adopters.

Anyone with a conventional 5.1 systems with the rear speakers placed higher than ear level (around 1.5-2.0m high), won't really fully benefit from a full 5.1.4/7.1.4 Atmos setup. These types of setups will benefit from a 5.1.2/7.1.2 setup adding in a pair of Atmos speakers nearer the front of the soundstage, filling in the biggest gap that exists in many current systems. The more rearward Atmos speakers won't give as much benefit due to the higher rear speakers. They'll still work, and give some improvement, but not as much as they should.

For Atmos to perform at its best, the basic 5.1/7.1 system really needs these speakers to be placed around ear level, to be able to allow the in-ceiling (or speaker-top reflective) Atmos speakers to perform as they're intended.

As I've said before though, users with an existing 5.1 system shouldn't necessarily jump straight in to Atmos in order to improve their system. Sometimes it is the existing 5.1 setup that is holding back the system from performing as it should do - Atmos shouldn't be used as a fix. Get the basic 5.1 system doing what it should be doing first and then think about adding Atmos.

5.1/5.1.2 is fine for average/small rooms. 7.1/7.1.2 is fine for wider rooms. 5.1.4/7.1.4 and 5.2.4/7.2.4 are better for larger rooms. There are a lot of variables though (viewing distance for starters), so nothing is set in stone.

 

[Frank Harvey]

*drinks*

So 5.1.4 is indeed better than 7.1.2!!

I'd go with that.

 

[Glacialpath]

For Atmos to perform at its best, the basic 5.1/7.1 system really needs these speakers to be placed around ear level, to be able to allow the in-ceiling (or speaker-top reflective) Atmos speakers to perform as they're intended.

This was why I asked BB where his surrounds would be positined. As we know surrounds and maybe fronts should be above ear level to help with height in the sound field.

With having dedicated height/top speakers it makes a lot of sence to lower the surrounds/fronts to ear level to allow the Atmos speakers to do their job.

It seems this whole Atmos system thingy need a lot of thought. As you point out, people will be buying and Atmos set up, getting a difference but not quite as big a difference as say going from Pro Logic to a full Descrete mix where you can place sounds in exact locations unlike Pro Logic that just pushes the outer part of the stereo field to all speakers.

For anyone else reading this I wouldn't puch much confidence in the Authoring houses doing my QC work to check the Atmos Channels. In my last job they didn't even have a 7.1 set up so any 7.1 feature codecs were only QC'd in a 5.1 suite. I would expect them to rush out a fit a suite with a full 7.1.4 Atmos set up let alone even us Channel metering.

I was/am appauled at the industry in how it goes about testing. Yes the Atmos codec will have had plenty of QC to make sure its all there but when it comes to the end user product (Ex Blu-Ray) not all authoring houses will feel the need to spend money on only a handful of titles that come through their schedule.

This is why the industry rushing to find new ways to keep us buying is ultimately killing itself. Not all the different aspects of the process can/want to keep up and when we don't really take the new fancy things on because they come so thick and fast they fall by the wayside.

Still. I would be nice if Atmos Codecs could become the norm. Be it Dolby or what ever DTS come up with. There are so many action block buster films being pushed throug at a fast rate of knots, that we could have plenty of titles in no time for people to enjoy at home.

I suppose one question is, if anyone know the answer. Do they mix 11 descrete channels 7+4 so a 5.1.2/7.1.2 set up will down mix the remaining 2. Or do the also have 9 descrete channels like we have 5.1 and 7.1, then allow the 11 channel AVR upscale the mix to all channels?

I suppose I should do some research.

 

[Son_of_SJ]

The Marantz doesn't have extra pre-outs to drive the 2 fronts separately via stereo amplifier, unlike Yamaha RX-A3040.

I'm certainly not trying to persuade you away from Yamaha, bigboss, three of my four home cinema setups use Yamaha receivers! I checked just for my own interest. I went to this Marantz UK site and hovering the mouse over the rear panel diagram gives close-ups. The Marantz does indeed have pre-outs for 11 channels. Normally using an 11.1 Audyssey system, you would add the extra stereo amplifier to drive the front wide speakers, as I do with my Denon AVR-4810. However, should you wish, you can also take the preouts for the main front left and right channels and send them to a further extra stereo amplfier. What my Denon doesn't let me do it so use the extra stereo ampfiier for the main left and right front channels, while at the same time using the Denon's nine channels for the other speakers, including the front wides. And as you know, Denon and Marantz are sister brands.

 

[bigboss]

Oh dear, you ARE persuasive aren't you?

You make some valid points about Marantz. I'll investigate further.

 

[bigboss]

Oh dear, you ARE persuasive aren't you?

You make some valid points about Marantz. I'll investigate further.

 

[Son_of_SJ]

This thread can be used as good info for other future Atmos adopters.

Yes, indeed! Or useful information even for those who decide not to adopt Atmos.

Anyone with a conventional 5.1 systems with the rear speakers placed higher than ear level (around 1.5-2.0m high), won't really fully benefit from a full 5.1.4/7.1.4 Atmos setup. These types of setups will benefit from a 5.1.2/7.1.2 setup adding in a pair of Atmos speakers nearer the front of the soundstage, filling in the biggest gap that exists in many current systems. The more rearward Atmos speakers won't give as much benefit due to the higher rear speakers. They'll still work, and give some improvement, but not as much as they should.

For Atmos to perform at its best, the basic 5.1/7.1 system really needs these speakers to be placed around ear level, to be able to allow the in-ceiling (or speaker-top reflective) Atmos speakers to perform as they're intended.

Gosh, this is really useful information, David, thank you very much - one advantage of having a retailer on the forums! Your sentences that I've underlined place me in some difficulty with my existing 11.1 system in the parlour (with front heights, front wides and surround backs). I've just checked the manual for my Denon AVR-4810 receiver, and it specifically says that the surrounds and surround backs should be 60-90 cm above ear level, and I dutifully have them about 80cm above ear level. The manual says that the front heights should be at least a metre high at an elevation of 45 degrees, which in my room means that the front heights are two metres high. And the manual for the Yamaha RX-A2010 which drives the 8.1 system in the kitchen says that the front presence speakers should be 1.8m high, as I have them. And, because it has compromises enforced by being a working kitchen and not an AV showroom, the surround speakers and the single rear back speaker are also about a metre high. So, even if I had the money for a new receiver, which I don't, I'd have to think carefully about implementing Atmos in my two biggest rooms. I do have more flexibillity with the bedroom systems, but maybe for the time being I'll just enjoy what I have.

 

[bigboss]

So, how would a combination of Marantz SR7009 and PM6005 work in a 7.1.4?

And if you want to reduce the volume, will you have to reduce the volume of both?

 

[Son_of_SJ]

So, how would a combination of Marantz SR7009 and PM6005 work in a 7.1.4?

That I'm not quite sure, I don't think that Steve Withers's review made it clear which of the 11 channels needed for Atmos 7.1.4 would be driven by the external amplifier. With my 11.1 Audyssey, it's the front wide speakers that are driven by the external amplifier. And, I say again, I don't think that the external stereo amplifier needs to be particularly good in what is a supporting role, though a visually matching Marantz PM6005 would indeed look nice, I grant you!

And if you want to reduce the volume, will you have to reduce the volume of both?

Almost certainly NOT, you'll be pleased to hear! With my system, once you adjust (during the initial sound checks) the volume on the external stereo amplifier so that the sound from the front wides is the same as from the other loudspeakers, you leave that volume control alone, and the signal is then under the control of the single master volume control of my Denon 4810. I can't imagine that the manufacturers won't do something similar for the external amplifier in an 7.1.4 Atmos system.

 

[bigboss]

What are front wide speakers? Just fronts, right?

 

[Son_of_SJ]

No doctor, that is not correct. Front wide speakers are in addition to the normal front speakers. So, my 11.1 system in the parlour consists of the following loudspeakers: front (left and right), centre, front high (left and right), front wide (left and right), surround (left and right), surround back (left and right) and the subwoofer. I know it sounds a lot, but in fact most people don't even notice the front wide speakers, because they're not very big and kinda blend into their surroundings, the centre is also hard to spot, the front heights are behind a medium-thickness curtain (and by the way, the audio calibration was done with the front heights behind the curtain) and the surround back are very small, only about the size of my hand. About the only speakers that people would notice are the fronts and the surrounds, which are all about a metre high, and the SVS PC13-Ultra tower subwoofer which generates many questions, usually along the lines of "What is that?"

This short article explains about Audyssey DSX and the importance of front wides. This more pictorial effort, which concludes with a nod to Atmos, has several diagrams, and the last schematic of 11.1 surround is pretty close to how I have all my speakers.

I've not heard any cinema or domestic Dolby Atmos arrangement. But, I can say with certainty, that there is a noticeable improvement in going from 5.1 or even 7.1 to the full Audyssey 11.1 layout. The improvement is not just in loudness but mainly in a greater feeling of envelopment, which is why I will be waiting for proof, funds permitting of course, that 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos is better - not just different from - than my existing 11.1. Going from 11.1 down to 5.1, the sound seems to collapse more than somewhat.