• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Building a multichannel system. Where and how to spend.

OP
Vacceo

Vacceo

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 9, 2022
Messages
2,636
Likes
2,753
I was going to link the RSL C34E and mention that I saw they were releasing a larger successor model but it looks like it's now live so I would say that it the one to look into next.

Personally I'm considering one to use as a dedicated kitchen speaker, mount it high up on the wall and have it angled down towards the cooking area. The steep angle and distance should means decent mono sound at the stove, sink, and counter without the reflections you'd get from a smaller speaker on the counter directly.
I´d be worried with the reflections on the tiles of your floor, but with a decent EQ and moderate volume, it should be fine.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,782
T
Hi all!

These last weeks I have been listening a lot of back and fourth discussion on speaker locations to reproduce Atmos and multichannel in general. I am wondering what is the science, studies and experience behind certain statements from different sources. Let´s see some of them.

-Gene in Audioholics considers that aside from left, center and right speakers, the most important are the ones on the sides.
His argument seems quite sound. Humans have a better sound perception to those stimuli coming to our front and sides compared to what comes to us from above or behind. Thus, Gene argues that if you have to save money on speakers, save on the rear ones for the benefit of of the front and sides. It is not stated, but I´m assuming that height speakers will provide a sound that the listener will not be able to perceive as clearly as the sound in front, so my guess is that cheaper speakers could be a fair compromise.

In an ideal world, all the speakers will be the same on all points, but we all know that this ranges from very difficult to directly impossible due to economy, space or aesthetics. Gene sounds very rational in his assesments but I´d like to know if you guys have something to add to this notion.

-There has been some controversy between the guys at Daily Hi Fi (particularly TechnoDad) and Audioholics about the location of height speakers for Atmos, DTS X and Auro 3d. The most evident notion is to set the upper speakers in the recommended configuration by Dolby to play Atmos. That is, a square around the listening spot for the upper layer angled towards the listening space and at a distance in the horizontal plane from the base layer speakers. This is the setup that the mastering in Atmos assumes on the side of the user, hence, it makes sense to replicate it as much as possible.


However, to archive a more flexible system, it is also argued that it is also possible to set an Auro-style setup with the height speakers not on (or in) the ceeling, but right above the base layer speakers if the angles are followed. With that configuration, Atmos could sound equally well. The guys in Audioholics argue that while possible, this is a substandard solution that delivers a weird sound that may or may not be to your liking, but that it is definetly not what Atmos is supposed to sound like. Due to the low amount of content in DTS X and the incredibly low amount of sources in Atmos 3D, it makes more sense to adhere to an Atmos setup as DTS X is more agnostic about speaker placement.


Ideas? Any science or experimentation you can share about all these elements?

-Most multichannel content mastered with height speakers in mind is a 7.X.4 setup. More speakers could be meaningful for larger spaces due to several rows of seats or very wide fronts, but the routing of sound will have to do more with the interpretation of the decoder than playing the source material as mastered. That means that once we pass 7.X.4, there are very clear diminishing returns. Any info about this?

I have tried to be respectful to all positions and I´m not taking sides or bashing anyone. Quite on the contrary, I am recognizing my lack of knowledge and detail on all these topics. So if Chana, Gene, Matthew or any participant in all these references reads this topic, know that I´m not critizising your ideas in any way or form, I´m bringing this up to hopefully learn a thing or two.

Since most the fellow forum participants have no vested interest on Dolby, Auro or any gear manufacturer, and we have a trove of knowledge around here, I think this forum is a good neutral ground to discuss it.

And of course, thanks for your time!
I think there are a few considerations that are important…
-Dolby Atmos does have much more content that DTS:X or Auro. You will need to decide how much to consider the non Dolby formats in your setup.
-I think the Dolby Atmos Studio Setup Guide is worth reading and has some interesting ideas on layout that can and should be considered when figuring out where to place speakers..
-The other document worth considering is the Trinnov Speaker Layout Guide as it tried to get speaker layouts to account for different formats and to sound good for all listeners. HERE
I would say 7.x.4 is a great layout, but in some rooms 9.x.4 would be better (Using front wides). In many rooms there is a large gap between the L/R channels and the surrounds which are often placed behind the MLP. Front Wides fill that gap and keep the sound bubble in tact as sound moves around you. I would have a hard time choosing between front wides and surround back if I had to choose.
-In regards to speaker layout, optimize the seats you use most. For me it is 2 seats that are used 95% or more of the time. Every seat can’t be perfect but you can get the main seats very close to it.
 

Attachments

  • Dolby Atmos Home Entertainment Studio Technical Guidelines 2021 05.pdf
    314.2 KB · Views: 69

Adi777

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Messages
689
Likes
458
I would say 7.x.4 is a great layout, but in some rooms 9.x.4 would be better (Using front wides). In many rooms there is a large gap between the L/R channels and the surrounds which are often placed behind the MLP. Front Wides fill that gap and keep the sound bubble in tact as sound moves around you. I would have a hard time choosing between front wides and surround back if I had to choose.
I found that video:
Maybe it's have a sense only in big cinema rooms?
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,782
I found that video:
Maybe it's have a sense only in big cinema rooms?
Haven’t watched that video, mine was just from personal experience from adding them. Good to see others that find them important as well.
Just be aware…
-on some Atmos material they will be silent. It is a title by title scenario. Some get used quite a lot and others not so much, whether a choice by the mixer, or if they were mixed in a fixed output such as 7.1.2 or 7.1.4 (no objects).
-FW are used to great effect with DTS Neural X upmixer which I find is outstanding with 5.1/7.1 material
-FW may or may not be used with Dolby DSU. This will be dependent on your processor
 

Adi777

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Messages
689
Likes
458
Good to see others that find them important as well.
Well, not exactly for the author of this video.
Also one of the comment is interesting:

"The problem with Front Wides is the fact that they even exist in the first place just shows that most people don't actually know how to setup their own home theaters properly. Everyone sets their Front L and R speakers literally on the left and right sides of their TV. You're actually supposed to be setting them to the left and right sides of YOUR LISTENING AREA -- to be even more specific, right outside the left and right sides of the seating area itself. This is how you create a proper soundstage. It's always supposed to be wider and larger than your field of vision. When you place the L and R speakers right up to the sides of your TV, they are effectively just serving as center speakers because they're still in the middle of your auditory sensory field. Think about it: your headphone and earbud L and R speakers don't sit in front of your eyes shooting sound at you from the front, do they? No, they literally go the absolute left- and rightmost positions they can over your ears which gives you a perfect soundstage. So why would you place your freestanding speakers in front of your eyes? If you can see them along with your TV screen in your FOV without moving your head, the placement is wrong! They should only be visible in your peripheral vision if at all. I'd even argue they should be further spread out if you have the room to be completely outside your peripheral vision, all the way to the left and right of the room itself if you can. If people would just set up their speakers properly, there'd be no need for Front Wide speakers at all. So why doesn't the audio industry educate people better on how to properly set up their speakers? Because they make more money selling you more receivers and speakers, of course! That's why every promotional picture you ever see of a home theater setup has the L and R speakers right beside the TV. Because now you think you're supposed to set them up that way and then you feel the need to buy Front Wides when you realize your soundstage is too small and now you feel special as join the audio elite by buying even more expensive receivers that can handle Front Wides and a couple of more speakers. If you still really feel the need for Front Wides, here's a great and relatively inexpensive (well, inexpensive in comparison to buying a new A/V receiver and another pair of speakers to serve as Front Wides) little hack that you can use which is what I do: just use bipolar surround speakers as your front L and R speakers and angle them inwards towards the listening area! Not only is the Front Wide area now covered by the soundstage, you'll always have sound in that area and you won't have to jump through the A/VR settings hoops Ealan showed us in this video."
 
OP
Vacceo

Vacceo

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 9, 2022
Messages
2,636
Likes
2,753
T

I think there are a few considerations that are important…
-Dolby Atmos does have much more content that DTS:X or Auro. You will need to decide how much to consider the non Dolby formats in your setup.
-I think the Dolby Atmos Studio Setup Guide is worth reading and has some interesting ideas on layout that can and should be considered when figuring out where to place speakers..
-The other document worth considering is the Trinnov Speaker Layout Guide as it tried to get speaker layouts to account for different formats and to sound good for all listeners. HERE
I would say 7.x.4 is a great layout, but in some rooms 9.x.4 would be better (Using front wides). In many rooms there is a large gap between the L/R channels and the surrounds which are often placed behind the MLP. Front Wides fill that gap and keep the sound bubble in tact as sound moves around you. I would have a hard time choosing between front wides and surround back if I had to choose.
-In regards to speaker layout, optimize the seats you use most. For me it is 2 seats that are used 95% or more of the time. Every seat can’t be perfect but you can get the main seats very close to it.
I play games coded in DTS, Atmos and upmixed, hence, having a layout that can reasonable reproduce both is a good idea. Wides in my case make no sense as the room is not that wide or long to have a clear void between the front speakers and the side ones.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,782
Well, not exactly for the author of this video.
Also one of the comment is interesting:

"The problem with Front Wides is the fact that they even exist in the first place just shows that most people don't actually know how to setup their own home theaters properly. Everyone sets their Front L and R speakers literally on the left and right sides of their TV. You're actually supposed to be setting them to the left and right sides of YOUR LISTENING AREA -- to be even more specific, right outside the left and right sides of the seating area itself. This is how you create a proper soundstage. It's always supposed to be wider and larger than your field of vision. When you place the L and R speakers right up to the sides of your TV, they are effectively just serving as center speakers because they're still in the middle of your auditory sensory field. Think about it: your headphone and earbud L and R speakers don't sit in front of your eyes shooting sound at you from the front, do they? No, they literally go the absolute left- and rightmost positions they can over your ears which gives you a perfect soundstage. So why would you place your freestanding speakers in front of your eyes? If you can see them along with your TV screen in your FOV without moving your head, the placement is wrong! They should only be visible in your peripheral vision if at all. I'd even argue they should be further spread out if you have the room to be completely outside your peripheral vision, all the way to the left and right of the room itself if you can. If people would just set up their speakers properly, there'd be no need for Front Wide speakers at all. So why doesn't the audio industry educate people better on how to properly set up their speakers? Because they make more money selling you more receivers and speakers, of course! That's why every promotional picture you ever see of a home theater setup has the L and R speakers right beside the TV. Because now you think you're supposed to set them up that way and then you feel the need to buy Front Wides when you realize your soundstage is too small and now you feel special as join the audio elite by buying even more expensive receivers that can handle Front Wides and a couple of more speakers. If you still really feel the need for Front Wides, here's a great and relatively inexpensive (well, inexpensive in comparison to buying a new A/V receiver and another pair of speakers to serve as Front Wides) little hack that you can use which is what I do: just use bipolar surround speakers as your front L and R speakers and angle them inwards towards the listening area! Not only is the Front Wide area now covered by the soundstage, you'll always have sound in that area and you won't have to jump through the A/VR settings hoops Ealan showed us in this video."
Guess I should have watched the video :)
But I completely disagree with his conclusion about the value of wides. My LCR are set up to dolby spec as well as my surrounds and the gap (in degrees) is very large. Putting FW in there is perfect. And using a bipolar speaker for L/R, seriously? FW works great with upmixing to fill the game and with Atmos, is a discrete channel. Just from the above quotes, I wouldn’t listen to him regarding a multichannel setup.
 

Chrispy

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
7,757
Likes
5,915
Location
PNW
@Vacceo what size room do you have? Is it a dedicated room or used in a variety of ways? Limits for types of/placement of speakers involved? Seems in smaller rooms 5.x.4 would be better than forcing more bed layer speakers into the mix from many comments I've read (guess that supports the importance of surrounds) and find that a 5.1 system in a smaller room is better than trying to accommodate rear surrounds (or front). I have used front wides in a narrowish room and thought that was somewhat a waste, so took them out. Personally have a coupa multich systems, but none with overheads, with my ceilings just not something I want to do. Good luck with yours!
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,782
How big is your cinema room?
Approx 23'x14'. Screen is a 2.35 AR, 122"W. L/R are currently outside the screen, seating distance at around 13-14 feet from screen with a second row on a riser. With FW the distance is too great to create a stereo/phantom image between the L/R and the Surround speakers that are slightly behind the MLP.
 

Adi777

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Messages
689
Likes
458
Approx 23'x14'. Screen is a 2.35 AR, 122"W. L/R are currently outside the screen, seating distance at around 13-14 feet from screen with a second row on a riser. With FW the distance is too great to create a stereo/phantom image between the L/R and the Surround speakers that are slightly behind the MLP.
So, your point is, that FW have sense, when distance between L/R and surround isn't too big, right?
I have 20'x13'.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,782
So, your point is, that FW have sense, when distance between L/R and surround isn't too big, right?
I have 20'x13'.
Yes, exactly. Angles will tell you if it is necessary or some good material with front>back/back>front panning.
 
OP
Vacceo

Vacceo

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 9, 2022
Messages
2,636
Likes
2,753
Approx 23'x14'. Screen is a 2.35 AR, 122"W. L/R are currently outside the screen, seating distance at around 13-14 feet from screen with a second row on a riser. With FW the distance is too great to create a stereo/phantom image between the L/R and the Surround speakers that are slightly behind the MLP.
I wonder if in a room with the front being the longer side (a rectangle with the front and back as long sided), FW´s make sense; as in truth, the tendency is towards concentrating the sound on a square, more than distributing the speakers along the front and rear.

@Vacceo what size room do you have? Is it a dedicated room or used in a variety of ways? Limits for types of/placement of speakers involved? Seems in smaller rooms 5.x.4 would be better than forcing more bed layer speakers into the mix from many comments I've read (guess that supports the importance of surrounds) and find that a 5.1 system in a smaller room is better than trying to accommodate rear surrounds (or front). I have used front wides in a narrowish room and thought that was somewhat a waste, so took them out. Personally have a coupa multich systems, but none with overheads, with my ceilings just not something I want to do. Good luck with yours!
It´s a 6 and a bit (less than 6,5) meters per 5 and a bit (also less than 5,5) meters. Walls are a bit more than 3 meters tall (3,20 or so). It is a living room, so not really a dedicated space. Part of the problem is a relatively long window on one of the 5 meter walls (covering around 2,5 meters x 1,2 tall). It´d be possible to use any side as front, but due to light, the longer wall is prefeered as it is easier to keep it shady for better visual contrast on the screen.
 
Last edited:

Adi777

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Apr 14, 2022
Messages
689
Likes
458
Yes, exactly. Angles will tell you if it is necessary or some good material with front>back/back>front panning.
Who knows? Maybe in my room - not very big, FW will be a good idea. Maybe better than rear surrounds. Probably the best it's to have a both. 11.4.4 system, this must be amazing ;)
 

ooheadsoo

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 14, 2020
Messages
198
Likes
163
Well, not exactly for the author of this video.
Also one of the comment is interesting:

"The problem with Front Wides is the fact that they even exist in the first place just shows that most people don't actually know how to setup their own home theaters properly. Everyone sets their Front L and R speakers literally on the left and right sides of their TV. You're actually supposed to be setting them to the left and right sides of YOUR LISTENING AREA -- to be even more specific, right outside the left and right sides of the seating area itself. This is how you create a proper soundstage. It's always supposed to be wider and larger than your field of vision. When you place the L and R speakers right up to the sides of your TV, they are effectively just serving as center speakers because they're still in the middle of your auditory sensory field. Think about it: your headphone and earbud L and R speakers don't sit in front of your eyes shooting sound at you from the front, do they? No, they literally go the absolute left- and rightmost positions they can over your ears which gives you a perfect soundstage. So why would you place your freestanding speakers in front of your eyes? If you can see them along with your TV screen in your FOV without moving your head, the placement is wrong! They should only be visible in your peripheral vision if at all. I'd even argue they should be further spread out if you have the room to be completely outside your peripheral vision, all the way to the left and right of the room itself if you can. If people would just set up their speakers properly, there'd be no need for Front Wide speakers at all. So why doesn't the audio industry educate people better on how to properly set up their speakers? Because they make more money selling you more receivers and speakers, of course! That's why every promotional picture you ever see of a home theater setup has the L and R speakers right beside the TV. Because now you think you're supposed to set them up that way and then you feel the need to buy Front Wides when you realize your soundstage is too small and now you feel special as join the audio elite by buying even more expensive receivers that can handle Front Wides and a couple of more speakers. If you still really feel the need for Front Wides, here's a great and relatively inexpensive (well, inexpensive in comparison to buying a new A/V receiver and another pair of speakers to serve as Front Wides) little hack that you can use which is what I do: just use bipolar surround speakers as your front L and R speakers and angle them inwards towards the listening area! Not only is the Front Wide area now covered by the soundstage, you'll always have sound in that area and you won't have to jump through the A/VR settings hoops Ealan showed us in this video."
Although I wish what you say was true, as it would indeed save money and headache, I don't think it's true - because the angles are a standard and that's how movies are mixed. For example, it's very common when something appears on the left of the screen and flies to the right, the sounds starts hard panned to the left. Unless you have a gigantic screen, if your left speaker is placed all the way as far as it can go to the left, the sound will have almost no correlation with what you see on the screen. In other words, if the object appears screen left and the sound is hard panned to where your left speaker is, but your left speaker is not next to the screen but way off at a >45 degree angle, the sound will not correspond to where the object is on the screen. Maybe if you had a 150"+ screen
 

JoachimStrobel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 27, 2019
Messages
518
Likes
303
Location
Germany
From what I have read from Harman, human audition is not as good from the rear and above than from the front and sides (what Gene argues in the video), so the not that great speakers will be fine on the rear. Give both options a try and tell us!


I was thinking something similar. If the front stage is around 2,5 meters away from the listener and the rear wall is around the same distance (relatively short room), there shouldn´t be a huge difference between a speaker located up on the wall next to the ceeling or in the ceeling itself (let´s consider a 3 meter tall room) as long as the angles are kept within spec.
So, I ended up moving my floorstanders to the side and attaching small loudspeakers as back. That is better than before. I did not notice that my rears should have been sides all the time. I play some Tidal Atmos Jazz tunes. It sound displeasing. I probably need to run Dirac next. Playing 2 channel und upmixing it with Dolby to all speakers (7.1.4) sounds better. I know this should not be like that, but can not help it…
 
OP
Vacceo

Vacceo

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 9, 2022
Messages
2,636
Likes
2,753
So, I ended up moving my floorstanders to the side and attaching small loudspeakers as back. That is better than before. I did not notice that my rears should have been sides all the time. I play some Tidal Atmos Jazz tunes. It sound displeasing. I probably need to run Dirac next. Playing 2 channel und upmixing it with Dolby to all speakers (7.1.4) sounds better. I know this should not be like that, but can not help it…
Thanks for telling us about your experience! Sound is an acquired taste to an extent, so after calibration, you should have a better picture.

Again, keep telling us about your experience.
 

birdog1960

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2022
Messages
309
Likes
329
Location
Virginia
Interestingly, I've noted significantly less clarity when playing music in a surround mode (by mistake) than pure direct. Lots of factors in play but it implies more distortion in surround to me. Could just be that my fronts are better than my center and surrounds but it begs the question. And I'm doing 5.1. Wonder if it would be even more noticeable with 7.1 or more. One also wonders if this isn't primarily about selling more speakers...
 

JoachimStrobel

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Jul 27, 2019
Messages
518
Likes
303
Location
Germany
Well, as I posted several times, Stereo is an underdetermined system and 2 speakers „sound“ good and are financially do-able in the promised quality. But the concept is 70 years old and deserves an overhaul. The 4-5 channel idea is 50 year old and entertaining. Freeing the sound engineering from the amount of speakers sounds kind of up to date, it seems to need a bit more attention to fidelity. Backchannels and heights add that roomy sound while the center and the sides add diversity.
 
OP
Vacceo

Vacceo

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 9, 2022
Messages
2,636
Likes
2,753
Well, as I posted several times, Stereo is an underdetermined system and 2 speakers „sound“ good and are financially do-able in the promised quality. But the concept is 70 years old and deserves an overhaul. The 4-5 channel idea is 50 year old and entertaining. Freeing the sound engineering from the amount of speakers sounds kind of up to date, it seems to need a bit more attention to fidelity. Backchannels and heights add that roomy sound while the center and the sides add diversity.
I think the usual problem with multichannel is the exponential increase in price. A good pair of speakers, an amp and preamp and even a subwoofer can get you an incredible sound for a not so massive price. But keeping that quality for multi increases the cost exponentially. Add on top that the electronics for multichannel can and should get better, so even higher cost.

EQ for multichannel has an extra degree of complexity due to amount of sources...

Still, I think Amir and many other people around here are doing the AudioGods work by pushing for better standards, better speakers and more excellence in engineering. Sure, ASR may be far from the largest bullhorn, but it is not a whisper either.
 
Top Bottom