DTS X rival to Dolby Atmos

[RajithKumar]

I have experienced Auro 3d in theaters .It's very good. But not in the HT setup.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

 

[RajithKumar]

Now the upgrade allows to switch it over DTS HDMA with DSU or Neural X . likewise Dolby formats with Neural X. I need to install heightspeaker to hear the difference.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

 

[elangoas]

Now the upgrade allows to switch it over DTS HDMA with DSU or Neural X . likewise Dolby formats with Neural X. I need to install heightspeaker to hear the difference.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

What is DSU ?

 

[RajithKumar]

What is DSU ?

DSU -Dolby surround

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

 

[yugaaa]

Wides was the best (IMO) that could happen to Horizontal layout (Audyssey DSX & DTS Neo X).

Front & surround Heights are very easy for anybody at home than the demanding ceiling speakers to recreate the movie theater environment.. Atlest in India, where we have concrete roof's..



Very much indeed.. Think DTS should have acquired Auro 3D, like they did with SRS. It would have stayed on for sometime..



Read somewhere, DTS X doesn't support wides..not very sure..But DTS X support Dolby's identical ceiling speaker layout..



Think this is partly because of Studio's and lack of access to affordable AVR here.. Denon & Marantz were the only one's to support Auro 3D on the AVR, which were extremely pricey.. This may have turned the BD mastering to DTS/Dolby than Auro 3D.

In a theater the camera and the sound are integrated . In the sense that only if you had a camera that supported DTS or Dolby or Auro3d you could play back the sound format . That is why i think probably DTS -X does not support wides . Almost all the hollywood block busters are Auro3d mastered . Probably the Auro3D has a much better immersive format than the rest . Also , I think it is got something to do with 3d capable projectors .
In India theaters which exhibit Hollywood movies have a different format than the ones with local content . This is primarily due to cost . The hollywood specs require a different format with added security and higher resolution with added brightness .

 

[kaptan]

I totally agree too many speakers dont add value. I have already watched jungle book movie in theater with dolby atmos. And again i watched the movie on bluray with DTS HDMA 7.1in my home theater, omg wat a difference. Here comes the best part the sound with dts hd is wat i liked and its a more immersive experience. The dynamics were excellent and really felt how much i missed in the commercial theater that too with dolby atmos. There are lot of details that i was able hear and feel with the dts hd track. I am not a latest 3d sound believer. this bluray again proved it what i actually beleived. Waiting for now you see me 2 and conjuring 2 blurays which seem to have dolby atmos track.

I personally belive auro 3d is better than atmos and dts, for its precised speaker placements that really adds a layer to the sound.

 

[elangoas]

Sometimes , too many speakers do not add value

Hmmm.. May be not rows of overhead speakers like in theater's.... But few @ home should make a difference...

I totally agree too many speakers dont add value. I have already watched jungle book movie in theater with dolby atmos. And again i watched the movie on bluray with DTS HDMA 7.1in my home theater, omg wat a difference. Here comes the best part the sound with dts hd is wat i liked and its a more immersive experience. The dynamics were excellent and really felt how much i missed in the commercial theater that too with dolby atmos. There are lot of details that i was able hear and feel with the dts hd track. I am not a latest 3d sound believer. this bluray again proved it what i actually beleived. Waiting for now you see me 2 and conjuring 2 blurays which seem to have dolby atmos track.

Having tried front wides + front heights with Audyssey DSX, Dolby PL IIz and DTS NeoX (though matrix channels), it for sure enhanced movie watching @ home and i don't feel like to go back to 5.1

Imagine if Wides & many heights with discrete information, should sound significantly better than the traditional 5.1.. This is what Auro 3D was (minus Wides)

 

[elangoas]

In a theater the camera and the sound are integrated . In the sense that only if you had a camera that supported DTS or Dolby or Auro3d you could play back the sound format . That is why i think probably DTS -X does not support wides . Almost all the hollywood block busters are Auro3d mastered . Probably the Auro3D has a much better immersive format than the rest . Also , I think it is got something to do with 3d capable projectors .

Not much aware abt the recording equipment's used.. But don't the camera support DTS/Dolby if not Auro 3D.. If that is the case, then it should allow DTS X to support wides..

No idea why DTS X didn't support wides...

In India theaters which exhibit Hollywood movies have a different format than the ones with local content . This is primarily due to cost . The hollywood specs require a different format with added security and higher resolution with added brightness .

Do you mean to say the hollywood content is downsized for playback in India ?

I personally belive auro 3d is better than atmos and dts, for its precised speaker placements that really adds a layer to the sound.

I haven't watched any movies in Auro 3D, Dolby Atmos (or) DTS X in theaters... But yet, like the Auro 3D speaker layout than the other formats.. straight & simple.. Just one center ceiling speaker..

 

[manoj.p]

In a theater the camera and the sound are integrated . In the sense that only if you had a camera that supported DTS or Dolby or Auro3d you could play back the sound format . That is why i think probably DTS -X does not support wides . Almost all the hollywood block busters are Auro3d mastered . Probably the Auro3D has a much better immersive format than the rest . Also , I think it is got something to do with 3d capable projectors .
In India theaters which exhibit Hollywood movies have a different format than the ones with local content . This is primarily due to cost . The hollywood specs require a different format with added security and higher resolution with added brightness .

thanks for enlightening post.

 

[sdurani]

On the contrary , I think Auro3d is standard on almost all the digital cinema theaters in the world.

No. Atmos is installed in over 1600 theatres, Auro in only 600.

The no. of titles is far greater than Atmos or DTS -X .

No. Over 400 titles mixed in Atmos, only 150 in Auro.

Sometimes , too many speakers do not add value

More speaker locations = greater flexibility (you don't have to use all the locations, but it does give you more placement choices for however many speakers you do want to use). Lack of flexibility doesn't make Auro better.

If you do decide to use more speakers, then that gives you greater wrap-around envelopment AND more precise localization. Lack of immersion and directionality doesn't make Auro better.

 

[sdurani]

Wides was the best (IMO) that could happen to Horizontal layout (Audyssey DSX & DTS Neo X).

Whether you end up liking Wides or not comes down to personal preference. My point was that Atmos and DTS:X at least give you the option to try Wides; those formats support Wides while Auro does not.

Front & surround Heights are very easy for anybody at home than the demanding ceiling speakers to recreate the movie theater environment.. Atlest in India, where we have concrete roof's..

True. Of the 5 pairs of height locations that Atmos supports, two of those pairs are high up on the walls (the other three pairs are on the ceiling). If you can't put speakers on the ceiling, then you can use the locations high up on the walls and still be within the Atmos spec.

Think DTS should have acquired Auro 3D, like they did with SRS.

SRS had something to offer: object-based mixing. That's why DTS bought SRS Labs. DTS:X is based on SRS technology.

Auro had nothing to offer except more channels, which DTS can do on their own. DTS would not have gained anything by buying Auro.

Read somewhere, DTS X doesn't support wides..not very sure..But DTS X support Dolby's identical ceiling speaker layout..

DTS:X supports wides and so does its upmixer Neural:X.

Atmos has 10 speaker locations above the listener. DTS:X has 12 speaker locations (plus VOG) above the listener. The good news is that they have 4 locations in common. See speakers circled in green in pic below:

Think this is partly because of Studio's and lack of access to affordable AVR here.. Denon & Marantz were the only one's to support Auro 3D on the AVR, which were extremely pricey.. This may have turned the BD mastering to DTS/Dolby than Auro 3D.

It's a vicious circle. Without Auro decoders in AVRs, studios don't have incentive to release Auro mixes. Without Auro titles on BD, manufacturers don't have incentive to license Auro decoding for their AVRs.

 

[kaptan]

Front wides gives a better soundstage. What the avr does is only sending the part of same information that is being sent to the front left and right speakers to the wide channels. There is no discrete information given by the sound mixers for those wide channels. But still would love to hear that setup and see the difference.

 

[elangoas]

Front wides gives a better soundstage. What the avr does is only sending the part of same information that is being sent to the front left and right speakers to the wide channels. There is no discrete information given by the sound mixers for those wide channels. But still would love to hear that setup and see the difference.

Yes.. Right..Your AVR supports front wides (Audyssey DSX & DTS Neo X).. if you have a pair of speakers, try that and share your experience..

With Atmos & DTS X supporting wides, it needs to be seen if there is a mention of Wides content..

 

[rajuisback]

Anyone tried the DTS X (or) Dolby Atmos BR Rip's..If so what is the least file size of the Rips..

Most BR Rips have a minimum of 748 Kbps DTS lossy (or) Dolby Digital lossy 5.1 tracks . Do we get DTS X tracks in 748 Kbps (or) Dolby Atmos in lossy format?

Usually the movie sizes are like 16 to 18 GB for BR Rip..and the same goes for DTS X English movies.

 

[elangoas]

Usually the movie sizes are like 16 to 18 GB for BR Rip..and the same goes for DTS X English movies.

Did go thru few BR Rips specification page and looks like Dolby Atmos is aval in lossless audio and the audio fle size alone is a good 5 GB.. But it seems to have a standard layout of L, C, R, SL, SR, SBL & SBR.. THere is mention of object based, but this is standard 7.1 layout & nothing special content of Atmos :sad:

So are DTS:X and Atmos aval in lossy formats in BR Rip's ?

 

[kaptan]

Yes.. Right..Your AVR supports front wides (Audyssey DSX & DTS Neo X).. if you have a pair of speakers, try that and share your experience..

With Atmos & DTS X supporting wides, it needs to be seen if there is a mention of Wides content..

Currently i am runnning back surrounds. Am totally satisfied with the current setup even better than the complex atmos setups. Will try later with my unused sony satellites.

 

[sdurani]

With Atmos & DTS X supporting wides, it needs to be seen if there is a mention of Wides content..

Atmos and DTS:X soundtracks have Wides content.

Those soundtracks are made up of two things: channels and objects. Since there are no Wide channels, it is only audio objects that will be reproduced by the speakers at the Wides locations.

In fact, if you set up a 9.1.2 speaker layout, you'll often find that the Wide speakers are more active than the Height speakers when playing Atmos soundtracks.

 

[elangoas]

Atmos and DTS:X soundtracks have Wides content.

Those soundtracks are made up of two things: channels and objects. Since there are no Wide channels, it is only audio objects that will be reproduced by the speakers at the Wides locations.

In fact, if you set up a 9.1.2 speaker layout, you'll often find that the Wide speakers are more active than the Height speakers when playing Atmos soundtracks.

Thanks for that info.. So apart from regular 5\7 channel standard layout, all other speaker locations will be object based ?

Would a BD have specific mention of object's on the back side of the box..Could you please share a BD image copy that contains this information?

When i get BR Rip's, i want to make sure am getting the right one's.. Hence..

 

[sdurani]

Thanks for that info.. So apart from regular 5\7 channel standard layout, all other speaker locations will be object based ?

Correct. If you use speakers for which there are no channels (e.g., Wides, Heights), then those speakers are fed with audio objects. Most home Atmos soundtracks have more content at the Wides location than overhead.

Would a BD have specific mention of object's on the back side of the box.

No need, since that is the nature of Atmos soundtracks. Like asking if cars come with a label that specifically mentions that they have an engine and 4 wheels.

When i get BR Rip's, i want to make sure am getting the right one's.. Hence..

That's the uncertainty of pirating movies: you never know what you're getting.

 

[elangoas]

Correct. If you use speakers for which there are no channels (e.g., Wides, Heights), then those speakers are fed with audio objects.Most home Atmos soundtracks have more content at the Wides location than overhead.

Great piece of info..Would love to have wides again hyeah:

No need, since that is the nature of Atmos soundtracks. Like asking if cars come with a label that specifically mentions that they have an engine and 4 wheels.

hyeah: Wasn't aware it was that simple information.. Have never seen an Atmos disc. Hence the clarification..

That's the uncertainty of pirating movies: you never know what you're getting.

That is how most majority of the members enjoy here... BD are expensive here...

Actually there is audio/video information on BR Rip's..But when i get BR Rip's, i look thru the audio information specifically and select the one's that meets the minimum criteria of surround experience..