Home Theater Forum and Systems banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anyone played with Audyssey 11.1 in their home theater? ...What is your opinion?

I am planning a new HT (13'x17') and was thinking about giving it a shot... not that anyone in their right mind needs 11.1 channels, but hey, who really needs a dedicated HT... So I figure what the hay... might as well!

Also, what do people like for speakers? I have some old Definitive Techs Bi that I love... so I was thinking about going with Mythos Ones for L/R/Sur and matching center (maybe something else for the extra 11.1 ch)... they sound absolutely amazing in the showroom! My speaker budget will be $5-10k up front and can be extended over time.

Looking forward to everyone's opinions! Thanks!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts
Haven't heard it, but the science and reasoning behind it seems sound. We simply hear better in front of us than behind us, so why not put more speakers there?

For that reason, I'd advise against mixing and matching any if the front, center, wide, height speakers. Depending on your room, speaker choice, sense if aesthetics, it may not be possible to have identical speakers, but you should stick with the same brand, same series as possible for the best chance at matching timbre.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I was thinking something smaller from the Mythos line for the high L/R since they have to be towards the top of the ceiling and the Mythos One are floor standing... Or do you think going with a smaller speaker all around to match would be better?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts
Well, I really like big speakers, but I'm a bigger fan of every setup I've heard that has 3 identical speakers across the front. I have not heard highs or wides in a setup.

Even the Mythos Gem is spec'd down to 60HZ (+/- ?db), so I would personally consider using those for all my speakers coupled with 1,2, or 4 capable subwoofers. That being said, just sticking with as much uniformity as possible, even if it means just staying within something from the Mythos line, should give you results that you'll be happy with.

Anyone want to argue in favor of larger speakers over uniformity?
 

·
Senior Shackster
Joined
·
365 Posts
I would be okay with 11.1 if we mixed in 11.1. However having a processor "making up" directional cues IMO is just a processor being used to distort an event. The fact that it is across the front makes it even worse than in the rear(which I could accept, its just fill).
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts
I would be okay with 11.1 if we mixed in 11.1. However having a processor "making up" directional cues IMO is just a processor being used to distort an event. The fact that it is across the front makes it even worse than in the rear(which I could accept, its just fill).
Definitely seeing your point, and once again acknowledging I haven't heard DSX, I will say that matrixing has and continues to serve us well. I'm impressed with what Dolby Prologic II can do to create ambiance from a stereo track, artificial as it may be.

Would I prefer 10.2 discrete? Yes. Am I willing to try DSX in the hopes that it fills the gap until 10.2 gets here? Yes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I would be okay with 11.1 if we mixed in 11.1. However having a processor "making up" directional cues IMO is just a processor being used to distort an event. The fact that it is across the front makes it even worse than in the rear(which I could accept, its just fill).

I see your point... basically that it is not recorded in 11.1, so we are relying on the receiver to create the additional channels required out of thin air. I will have to see if I can find a local showroom that has DSX setup. If I manage to find one, I will report my findings! It will be interesting to see if it takes off like Dolby Digital, or falls flat.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts
Yes, well, it's a complicated bit of thin air, lots of phase analysis and such. There is a good interview here with the dolby folks: http://www.dolby.com/consumer/experience/dolbycast/transcript/11-surround-sound-from-stereo.html

I recall listening to a podcast (not mine) with a great explanation of how this all works, but I can't find it right now. It also featured someone talking about hte history of dolby, but I can't find it right now. Anyone have other resources?

Not sure how similar Audyssey's solution is, but the science and execution of Dolby's methods have proven sound in theory and execution, despite being inferior to discrete channels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
I have to say... I'd want to try it out. As gimmicky as it might be, and even with nothing genuinely mixed in 11.2, I can't help thinking how nice it would be to be completely surrounded in sound. Like a nice warm blanket covering you. So is this the generally accepted 11 channel layout?



Truthfully, I really can't imagine how much the rear "presence" speakers would add, but I'd check it out.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Go for it and not look back.

The acoustic cues that DSX redirects information to new channels, placing it where the sound really was intended. Its more complex than matrixing. For instance with my height surrounds certain instrument, cues or sounds from whether it be movies, music or games comes from the new channel and not the other channels I do hear a lot of shared information to such as ambient, sibilance and acoustic projection. My girlfriend plays at Duquesne University as a Viola/Violin player, and I can tell you that the height surrounds add the necessary depth a concert has that is lacking/anemic in a 5.1 system. I have been to over 60 orchestral concerts in 2 years, many of which are professional such as the Pittsburgh Symphony (in the top 20 or in the world).

If I could I would go 11.1 in a heartbeat and would never hesitate to tell someone to either. If you think 11.1 muddles, smears, or colors the sound you've probably never listened to it and are just speculating :T .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Thanks Marshall. Looking at that diagram, I think 9.1 might be my limit... I'd still love to hear it for myself, but it seems like placement would get extremely complicated, and there's a good chance you could make your sound worse if not done right.
The heights need to be 45degree and just outside the L/R if the room is narrow place the wides closer to the listeners to attain the 60deg angles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
If you think 11.1 muddles, smears, or colors the sound you've probably never listened to it and are just speculating :T .
Thanks Bob, I was completely speculating, but your review has me intrigued. If the wides are supposed to be 60* out, I wonder if I could build angled walls at the front of the theatre (sort of like /-----\ ) to place them since I'm considering in-walls... or would they still be fine on a flat wall just outside the mains if the angle from the listening position was correct? One of my concerns is having a ton of speakers on stands at the front of the room.

For reference, here's the setup that Marshall pointed me to:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Owen that shaped room can work, its the right setup to produce a stage like throw of sound. As for the width surrounds I felt these would good options/solutions to Option 1 Option 2

They aren't cheap but cosmetically speaking I can't find a better (on/in-wall) option. If you do the tapered room you can place the width channels a bit closer to the listener to achieve the 60deg angle. I'd say you don't need it to be exactly 60, 55-65 would be a small enough tolerance, considering that off axis response of the speaker is good.
 

·
Senior Shackster
Joined
·
365 Posts
Go for it and not look back.

The acoustic cues that DSX redirects information to new channels, placing it where the sound really was intended. Its more complex than matrixing. For instance with my height surrounds certain instrument, cues or sounds from whether it be movies, music or games comes from the new channel and not the other channels I do hear a lot of shared information to such as ambient, sibilance and acoustic projection. My girlfriend plays at Duquesne University as a Viola/Violin player, and I can tell you that the height surrounds add the necessary depth a concert has that is lacking/anemic in a 5.1 system. I have been to over 60 orchestral concerts in 2 years, many of which are professional such as the Pittsburgh Symphony (in the top 20 or in the world).
First, DSX cannot direct anything accurately into the height channels, because no height channels are included within the original mix. It is making this location up. There is no height channels in the mixing studio, and no accomadation for them in the dubbing stage either. No where in any studio signal chain are height channels included, so the processor is randomly sending information to those channels.

A 5.1 system is usually the system movie soundtracks are created on, and they are not configured like DSX. Even when we mix for 7.1, it does not use DSX recommended speaker positions. DSX does not map 1:1 with any created sound mix.

If I could I would go 11.1 in a heartbeat and would never hesitate to tell someone to either. If you think 11.1 muddles, smears, or colors the sound you've probably never listened to it and are just speculating :T .
I have listened to it with soundtracks I have mixed and know well, and DSX and Dolby PLz are hit and misses with accuracy, and are not always representative of the intentions of the sound mixers. This is a fact. Both DPLz and DSX are re-creating new spatial positions within a mix that were never intended in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,074 Posts
Thanks Bob, I'll keep that in mind. I had originally been thinking of using a painted DIY screen, but am reading more about DIY acousticaly transparent screens and think I'm leaning that way now. Seems like the best way to get ideal placement, especially for the centre speaker. It would be much easier to use identical speakers for all 3 main channels if they can hide behind the screen and be right at the optimal height/orientation.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,807 Posts
Thanks Bob, I'll keep that in mind. I had originally been thinking of using a painted DIY screen, but am reading more about DIY acousticaly transparent screens and think I'm leaning that way now. Seems like the best way to get ideal placement, especially for the centre speaker. It would be much easier to use identical speakers for all 3 main channels if they can hide behind the screen and be right at the optimal height/orientation.
+1 for acoustically transparent screens. They are certainly a bit more expensive, but options like Seymour AV are reasonable. Especially when sitting closer to a large screen, the angle of a bottom/top mounted speakers is just a bit to much for my ears, and I always find myself, at some point, having my attention drawn to the center speaker with highly directional sound.

That being said, painted screen are inexpensive, save space, and perform great when done well. And your ears/speakers may perform differently than mine.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top