There's a reason you are called 'The Godfather Of Audio' Gene! Gene, you are the boss and even when you are challenged, you defend and defer with 'sound' advice, backed with years of knowledge and experience. Your efforts are always appreciated!
LOVE how informative these videos are. Probably the first real videos I’ve seen on this subject. Knowing and learning what codecs you prefer goes a long way when you’re looking at $5k receivers to buy. Errrr…when you can buy….
I laughed at "I don't know Joe...sounds like Auro is losing to Neural:X." I appreciate you Gene for doing these subjective tests also. I think the Auro sound is meant to have reduced higher frequencies because if an originating sound is coming from ear level and if you're 30° off axis vertically where the speakers for Auro are, then you expect a high-frequency drop off. If they had as much high frequencies up there, it would sound incorrect.
It reminds me of Dolby Prologic. I never like the sound of Prologic for that reason. But I didn't mind Auro for upmixing 5.1 in this case once all speakers were playing.
@@Audioholics Yeah, kind of. In Pro-Logic, they reduced the high frequencies in the surround speakers to reduce correlation and distracting splashes that would happen without the high frequency roll-off and added delay. In this case, I think the roll off and delay was used because it's psychoacoustically more correct for that to happen in a nearby height speaker if the sound is originating from an ear-level speaker below it.
@@joentell For ceiling ambience that may be ok but a plane flying overhead shouldn't be low passed. Your ears naturally do that and interfering takes away from that effect.
@@Audioholics You will hear lots of high frequencies from ear-level speakers when a plane passes by. You are correct that the HRTF of something overhead reduces high frequencies, but we're talking about Auro where the height speakers are 30° above the main speakers and are still in front of you. It needs to add that. It doesn't necessarily need to in the VOG channel which is directly above your head.
Great series on upmixing music specifically Gene. Thanks. My favorite 5.1 mixes are of three well recorded live concerts: Eagles Hell Freezes dvd in DTS Surround version. Chris Botti Live with Orchestra and Special Guests in Dolby Digital 5.1, lastly Andrea Bocelli Under the Dessert sky in DTS 5.1 In my 5.4.4 System the DTX Neural X does the best job over all in the upmix to the height channels.
I really like the information you provide us Gene! I would like to see a comparison of older 5.1 or 7.1 up mixed with Auro vs Atmos using each type of speaker placement to see if there is a difference? A lot of us just don’t have the resources to try all the different formats and speaker placements like you probably can. Or does someone in your group like Don or Matt have different setups of speaker placements that you could compare the Auro vs Atmos? the information you are giving us is great and I would like to see it go a step further!
I enjoy Auro the most. It seems like the surround and atmos channels get more dynamic sound. I have enjoyed your website and videos over the year. Trying to get my wife to buy into getting the 13" Monolith subwoofer you review a couple of months ago.
Thanks for sharing Gene. Understandable you've tested music first and I look forward to seeing your review of movies too. Your room is fantastic and your ceiling speakers are nicely set for Atmos. They are however quite out of spec for Auro, which makes comparing formats really difficult. Re movies, as you've said before when an Atmos mix is immersive, it's going to be best played back native, so when testing please select some content that doesn't have a good Atmos track (eg, Aquaman). Many thanks
That's a myth. The angular resolution of our hearing in the Sagittal plane above the cone of confusion isn't all that great. The 30deg restriction of heights for Auro sounds like religious dogma. My tops are wide dispersion and +- 20 degrees from MLP. This yields excellent separation of bed and height channels, better than I've achieved with front/back height channels in my old place with 8ft ceilings.
@@Audioholics Blimey, those are strong words. I agree that the separation between bed and height channels is better with the tops at +-20, as Anthony Grimani would recommend, and like you say, better than with front/back height channels. But Auro isn't trying to maximise the separation there, it's trying to link the two layers more. It is of course a different approach. If separation is needed, the Top channel is also available. Thanks for the reply and continued research.
Gene, this is great work and fascinating to learn more about what the different upmixers are actually doing. What i have found is (whatever the format you are listening to), much depends upon the quality of the source material (you can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear). We are all looking for a theatre-like experience but because we have different room and gear set ups our individual experiences are going to be a bit different. What bothers me about all the recent discussions about upmixing when watching movies, if the Studios and Blueray manufacturers hear this they may think it acceptable to produce everything only on 5.1 and assume we all use our preferred upmixer. In other words, they won't try for a higher standards of production in immersive content be it Dolby Atmos, DTSX or Auro 3D.
Of course Auro 3D (native or upmixed) will sound rather odd on an Atmos layout. It just isn’t meant to be played on a typical Dolby Atmos layout with in ceiling speakers. So to me this is an unfair comparison. That being said however, I do understand that most enthousiasts will have an Atmos layout and that makes this comparison justified indeed. But maybe you should mention more clearly to the audience that Auro needs heights under 30 degrees to deliver a coherent sound field. Would be nice if you could A/B compare a real Auro 3D setup with a real Atmos set up. And then compare these upmixers… Thanks Gene!
That's a bogus cop out. My in-ceiling speakers are wide dispersion and +-20deg from the MLP. If Auro can't handle a slight alteration of their rigid 30deg recommendation, then it's a limitation of their format that doesn't exist in the 2 competing ones. I've done height/ceiling tests before with Auro and my findings have been pretty similar. Most people don't have the ceiling height to support front/rear heights while getting enough separation of layers from my experience.
You can't just turn off everything but the heights. You have to listen to the entirety. Auro preserves the front soundstage much better than DSU. But DSU sounds great, too. It's true, you have to listen a while before you adapt to each. Initially they can sound odd.
@@Audioholics Disagree. It's strange, but somehow from the MLP, Auro puts everything up front in a big wall-like sound. DSU is too much "around" you even though the speakers are playing softer. Auro is like an audio illusion, but it works with music. I'm 50/50 when it comes to movie upmixing of 5.1 content. Rather just have Atmos.
@@erod9088 Really depends on your speaker layout, quality and preferences. My mains project a huge soundstage. I don't need more presence up front in my situation.
@@Audioholics So your position is based on having $70K front speakers? Not useful to 99% of people in the hobby. I have RBH signature speakers in my entire 9.2.6 system, but not not the top end models you have. Aurov wins most of the time with music upmixing. That's the prevailing opinion.
@@erod9088 No that's not what I said. You.often don't get good height separation in smaller rooms with low ceilings when people use towers as their mains. I haven't seen any studies that prove Auro wins for 2ch upmixing. I suspect if any exist, they didn't engage "center spread" with the DSU. I only know from my listening tests that Auro is NOT preferred for 2CH music upmixing by myself or anyone I've had over to give demos to.
Good job ole chap. I am impressed with your tireless regard in controlling for variables across A-B situations. Question: Might your speaker sizes colourise your output /inherent enjoyment of how each format performed? I have employ identical uppers and same-brand lowers (+ or - one upgrade level in the same bipolar speaker line). Music upmixer pref. is DD Movie / Action shows pref. is DTSX We are so blessed to have a reputable scientific research engineer in our midst for the community... God Bless and long health upon you and your household good Sir.
Yes speaker size can definitely have an impact as well as bass management. Personally, I always advise people to get the very best LCR's, those are the most important, especially if you listen to a lot of music. It's difficult to match height channels to really high performance LCR's as they tend to be large. Peace to you and happy holidays!
After your suggestion this week to turn center spread on for DSU on stereo music, I decided I like it better than All Channel Stereo. My Yamaha RX-A3070's manual suggests (at page 137) that setting only affects stereo, so I'm not sure whether my next question is meaningful, but is there any downside to leaving that setting on for 5.1 or 7.1 music or movies?
Heh Gene love your channel just got my Yamaha Rx A8A can you tell me how to change audio upmixes and audio stream.? I know you the A6A....thanks in advance
Thanks for the comparison and your thoughts Gene. After seeing Genesis last night and watching 70 year old Phil Collins sing next to his 20 year old son Nicholas on the drums, I can now compare my immersive PPG arena audio experience to my home 2 channel and 5.1 Genesis sources with the various 3D codecs. 😁. Our 7.2.6 system is set up more for an Auro 3D layout with front and rear height’s so I’m guessing we will prefer that up-mixer a little more on certain songs. As mentioned yesterday the DSU was also preferred on a small number of Genesis songs over Auro 3D. Something that really stands out to us though is how hard hitting and focused the bass can be with Auro 3D over the other two codecs. I’m curious if you found this same experience with all channels active (vs just the heights)? It is quite noticeable on our system. Our family prefers this pronounced bass but that’s just us. Keep up the great work. LOVE living in this era of immersive sound technology. So fun to experience these 3D up-mixers as we taylor sound to our own listening tastes!
Auro definitely boosts the bass level which could be welcomed on Prog Rock music that tends to be bass shy like Genesis. On a well produced source, I found the elevated bass levels Auro causes to sound unnatural, however.
@@Audioholics Thanks for the reply Gene. Would you be able to provide an example of a well produced bass source where you found the Auro 3D bass unnatural? I’ll give it a spin for comparison testing based upon our listening preferences. In response to your feedback regarding a LIGHT bass progressive rock band like Genesis, I decided to test a HEAVY bass influenced rock band like Rush.- A Show of Hands album. We’ve seen Rush four times in concert and are pretty familiar with their sound to compare. The intro song (titled intro) of the three stooges begins to play and then immediately switches to the second track Big Money. It is a VERY hard hitting bass song in the first second. It’s actually one of our demo songs for when guests come over to highlight our system. (it never fails to garner a smile 😊). Using Auro 3D Auromatic you get that punch you’re looking for without muddling the instruments or Geddy Lee’s voice. With the DSU it’s just not hard hitting or effective enough for our tastes. Neil Peart is just not given justice using the DSU codec. The audience around you is reproduced effectively by both codecs and it’s very immersive but again that bass is lacking in DSU throughout. Try it. It’s very noticeable. Switch between the two. Maybe it’s my two subs compared to your four. OR listen to the last minute of the 6: minute 22 second track Marathon (#4). It’s home shaking bass and a great comparison song. For 5.1 codec comparisons we played the Blu-ray pure audio recording of Alan Parson’s Tales of Mystery and Imagination. The nuances starting with A Dream within a Dream with that bass “heartbeat” flowing into the Raven using Auro 3D seemed to be just a little more revealing with bass hitting harder over the DTS HD setting. Honestly both codecs sound excellent and it really comes down to splitting hairs and listener preferences as mentioned. If you don’t have this disc I can highly recommend it especially for 3D immersive audio. As you know Alan Parsons produces some of the best recordings in the industry and those Edgar Allan Poe songs are haunting with that constant heartbeat bass throughout; earth shattering sound effects with the Fall of the House of Usher; and very immersive as the background vocals surround you on the Cask of Amontillado. Would love to hear your comments. Cheers. 🍻
Joe really gave you a challenge. I like the StormAudio layout, it is very symetrical and an easy acces to all the program features. As far as listening , the ear does take time to adjust to new sources and the effects.
What challenge? If Joe likes heights and fake immersive, it's fine by me. I prefer what the pros install and use as my listening results align with that. I built a reference room to accurately review and test equipment. We have different goals. No worries.
What is the software you use to up mix your music? And which do you think is better for each situation when connected to a PC. Ie DTS X vs Atmos vs Dolby for PC games vs movies vs music. Which is best for those scenarios.
my pc runs an hdmi out to a denon x4200 and im thinking about paying the 200 for auro 3d or upgrading to the 4500h because even games that support atmos often sound better with neural x, im thinking auro 3d would sound even better
Great content Gene!!! Just one question, would a layout make a difference for the experience with auro 3d? From what I see in the auro manual, they preach the height channels and in ceiling for voice of god. Since all your speakers are in the ceiling, just like most atmos home theaters, would there be a noticeable difference? Thanks once again as I am contemplating on putting in ceiling speakers or height speakers.
Both myself and other pro installers generally prefer in ceiling over on wall heights for Atmos. Since Auro has no native content, it's usually a good idea to support the layout that serves the content.
True, but no one has tested that. It’s true that you will not get AURO support based on Dolby’s layout for Atmos. Height usage is THEIR standard, so we are only to assume they have tried that.
I use an on-wall layout with front and rear heights at 30° angles because it sounds good with all the formats. Maybe not optimal for Atmos or DTS:X, but decent. Conversely, I had height speakers set for the Atmos layout and Auro sounded pretty bad.
@@TrueGenius On Sound United products, you can't use Auro unless you assign height channels, not tops. On higher end products like Storm and Trinnov, Auro still works for tops and sends the information to them accordingly. One of the biggest limitations with Auro, aside from no content, is their rigid stance on height speaker placement. If they would have been more accommodating on that aspect, they may have had a fighting chance to be a real contender.
Thanks for being fair with this comparison.It is a mixed bag, it depends on the mix of music or film, each title may be better in one than the other upmixer, the thing is to try everything, not just be a fan of one.I have tried movies where there is rain and sometimes there is no sound from the height speakers with Dolby Surround and with Neural X the sound is loud, in other movies the rain sounds good but with little atmosphere in Neural X and in Dolby surround you can hear the heavy rain and with ambient.
Awesome tutorial, but shane edges out the win with the trinnov surround visualization feature. I would buy up if the entry level AVRs offer the visualizer.
What ceiling speakers is Gene using that have the fixed baffle at 30 degrees? I bought four Infinity ERS610 on closeout (which cosmetically appears just like the Revel C760L) but now need to set up a 2nd system in another room. I considered the B-stock Elac Debut IC-DT61-W if they become available again. Andrew Jones did an interview several year ago explaining that a swiveling tweeter is a poor design choice which is why he designed his in-ceiling speaker with a fixed 30 degree baffle.
Hi Gene, glad you are doing well. What a difference a year makes in health and wealth (from battle COVID-19 to sitting in your new hi-tech home). Question about the results of the upmixing revolt against Dolby... did the change affect gear retroactively, or just gear that came after they conceded, and if it was retroactive, was the change addressed via a firmware update? I have a Pioneer Elite SC-99 from 2015, and I'm wondering if it too was affected by this?
Thanks and so true. I don't know what happened with Pioneer since they aren't' very communicative about stuff like this. The SU receivers lifted the restriction on new products after Dolby backed down. Legacy products weren't affected AFAIK.
@@Audioholics 2019 D+M models were affected but received an update to restore the ability back in November 2020 & Onkyo/Pioneer AVR's that were affected by the cross-format upmixing restriction were amazingly updated the end of last year too which is saying something because of the absolutely dire financial state they were in, yet Yamaha I believe still has this restriction in place with their 2018 & current 2020/21 AVR series for some strange unknown reason according to their user manuals :(
Guys, I always enjoy your informative videos! Check out "John Willliams Live In Virnna" blueray recorded in Dolby Atmos and "mixed in the extensive 9.1.4 format". It is on the Deutsche Grammophon label. Other audio listening formats include 2.0 DTS-HD MA 24bit / 96kHz, and 5.1 DTS-MA 24bit / 48Hz. It sounds great on my Yamaha RX-A3080 in 7.2.4. Enjoy! Joe C.
We have this version too Jo....totally agree. Fantastic source recording and the immersive listening experience takes this recording to the next level. Our entire family enjoys it as John Williams is our 26 year old son's favorite artist. Never get tired of playing it.
For me, center spread with Dolby was not enough: it helped, but still the center stage in music was anchored too much to the center channel. On the song "The Weekend" by Dave Rawlings Machine the singer is offset a little bit from center, and Dolby pins it straight to center even with spread on. This lead me to dumping the center channel altogether, which I haven't regretted yet, and it solves the problem with DTS as well.
Auro3d much depends on speaker placing. As you tested with surround and heights or tops. It should be verified with all speakers. And next subwoofer off it's not complete test. Auro is fine tuning all speakers for acheiving 2.0 sound image.
Been loving the back and forth between you and Joe. I find Auro interesting... But given how long they have been around and are still irrelevant from a native content standpoint, I don't know why anyone would compromise overhead sound by using their layout when doing x.x.4 just to support their "upmixer". And I say that as someone who has had an Auro layout in the past and now has closer to Atmos' mix room layout.
The auro speaker layout will work with atmos. The atmos layout will not work with auro. I have a small sample size of movies I've listened to with both native atmos and upmixer into auro. I will say, I have to put the blame on the people mixing the native atmos. But in quite a few instances, with disengaging every other speaker, except height channels, and I will say that there are too many instances of native atmos having zero sound when it should, or simply playing the musical score through the height channels. Not accurate in these instances at all. In the same instances, the sound that is missing in atmos, often seems to be replaced with ambient sound and reflection using the auro upmixer. I'm not exactly sure of the internal algorithm process, but in atmos tracks that are lacking, auro has done a very good job
@@danny51577 The Auro layout leaves too much of an angular gap above the listener in x.x.4. And if it puts sound in the heights that the sound designer didn't intentionally place there, it is not by definition "more accurate". There is more to cinema sound than what you think should be there, and mixers see those channels as an extra tool in their box. Not all of them will use them constantly... Or well.
@@TheReverendSlim oh I get what you are saying. The problem I have is when so uh nd should be there and isnt. Which seems to be the biggest problem with far too many native atmos mixes. And the ones that decide to play mostly musical score through the height channels. That was obviously placed there intentionally, except last i checked, I dont hear music above me when walking around the grocery store. In many of these cases, there are too many hands in the pot. I was just listening to an interview with an atmos mix tech, who was explaining that in his case, by the time the track gets to him, someone has mixed the lfe, someone else the 7 channel surround, and someone else the musical score. I'm not a proponent of either speaker layout as a whole solution, they both lack in certain areas. But from what I have heard in my limited sample size, I am becoming a proponent of the auro upmixer versus even native atmos in more and more situations. Even in the case of having physical atmos layout and then lie to the avr about placement to get the auro upmix.
@@danny51577 If you want your room to sound like whatever room Auro measured, it is a great option. Just be aware that it is generating that height info, not extracting it.
Gene, I know it may not matter to most owners to D+M products but for some reason Sound United are still restricting Dolby signals with the use of DTS' virtualizer DTS Virtual:X, the Atmos Height Virtualizer known as the "Speaker Virtualizer" Surround Parameter setting on the other hand imposes no such restrictions with DTS signals, I suppose it was too much work for them to remove that part of D+M's cross-upmixing firmware code :(
@@Audioholics Thanks Gene, that would be great as Sound United have been less than forthcoming about this imposed Dolby restriction on DTS' Virtual:X height virtualizer when I brought it to their attention last year back in June 2020 during a DTS:X Pro webinar with DTS' Glen Stone.
@@Audioholics Gene, I was just wondering if you had also mentioned to Sound United about the DTS Virtual:X issue with D+M AVRs that still imposes restrictions on the use of Dolby signals, Dolby's restriction policy has been abolished for around 2 years now so there is no excuse for Sound United to still restrict the use of Dolby signals with the use of DTS' Virtual:X height virtualizer, also it is truly baffling how Yamaha refuse to remove the Dolby/DTS cross-upmixing restriction with their current 2020/21 AVR lineup, that is very poor form indeed :(
@@Audioholics Gene, I was wondering if you had managed to inform your Sound United contact of the imposed restrictions on Dolby signals when utilising DTS Virtual:X, Sound United really ought to remove this restriction as it was abolished long ago, not sure why this cross-format upmixing restriction is still in effect when DTS' Virtual:X virtualiser is engaged on ALL D+M models since 2017 :(
I would like to throw down a challenge, to all you you-tubers. To find the best way to listen to “Godzilla Final Wars” It’s a little silly, but I’m not yanking your chain, There’s allot to love in this movie but the soundscape needs some help, my best results have strangely come from maxing out my bass and treble. What it really needs is some dynamic range expansion, but I’m curious how the up-mixers navigate the tracks. I feel it’s prime reference content for examining up mixing and other audio enhancements. My favorite scene is when Godzilla wakes up, spoiler alert, he’s muddaphuckin Godzilla!
Ya know what, maybe that’s a dumb idea. It’s not exactly an Oscar worthy movie. And the internet has been through enough already, Maybe it’s enough to say that a dynamic range enhancement feature or an “old movie mode” that auto detects DVD era audio compression, or screachy 1970’s tape distortion would be a sweet feature to have. I bet Ai and deep learning will bring some amazing new life to poor recordings and mixes.
Sincerely hope you don't screw up the movie comparison. The music comparison honestly is quite irrelevant to most people. As one of your harshest critic in your earlier video, to which i do apologize as i went slightly too far, I would challenge you to do your movie review on streaming services which most people watch new contents on now and really differentiate original 5.1 tracks and atmos track to demonstrate how Dolby is better (as I presume you would stick to your original case).
You are no longer listening to music you are more involved in your effects ,I listen to my music in old fashioned top quality stereo.These effects are great for well recorded DVDs.Unfortunately the titles are not great ,it’s all about effects not quality within the modern movies.I feel the equipment is getting better and content in the main is poor by comparison.You could spend a nice evening playing around with different combinations of effects rather that listening to the actual instrumentation and the musical abilities.
There's a reason you are called 'The Godfather Of Audio' Gene!
Gene, you are the boss and even when you are challenged, you defend and defer with 'sound' advice, backed with years of knowledge and experience. Your efforts are always appreciated!
I'm humbled by your comments. Thank you.
LOVE how informative these videos are. Probably the first real videos I’ve seen on this subject. Knowing and learning what codecs you prefer goes a long way when you’re looking at $5k receivers to buy. Errrr…when you can buy….
waiting for the 5.1/7.1 movie upmix comparison.... thats the MAIN event....!!! 😊
Absolutely.
Hope it is coming soon!
hi Gene, when you are uploading the 5.1 movie upmix comparison? Thanks
I laughed at "I don't know Joe...sounds like Auro is losing to Neural:X." I appreciate you Gene for doing these subjective tests also. I think the Auro sound is meant to have reduced higher frequencies because if an originating sound is coming from ear level and if you're 30° off axis vertically where the speakers for Auro are, then you expect a high-frequency drop off. If they had as much high frequencies up there, it would sound incorrect.
It reminds me of Dolby Prologic. I never like the sound of Prologic for that reason. But I didn't mind Auro for upmixing 5.1 in this case once all speakers were playing.
@@Audioholics Yeah, kind of. In Pro-Logic, they reduced the high frequencies in the surround speakers to reduce correlation and distracting splashes that would happen without the high frequency roll-off and added delay. In this case, I think the roll off and delay was used because it's psychoacoustically more correct for that to happen in a nearby height speaker if the sound is originating from an ear-level speaker below it.
@@joentell For ceiling ambience that may be ok but a plane flying overhead shouldn't be low passed. Your ears naturally do that and interfering takes away from that effect.
@@Audioholics You will hear lots of high frequencies from ear-level speakers when a plane passes by. You are correct that the HRTF of something overhead reduces high frequencies, but we're talking about Auro where the height speakers are 30° above the main speakers and are still in front of you. It needs to add that. It doesn't necessarily need to in the VOG channel which is directly above your head.
@@joentell I think it's a compromised concept but we a arguing over betamax anyway. LOL.
Just want to say, Gene, that your channel is god sent and I appreciate your content. Keep up the good work. Big fan!
Yes sir! I remember the Bouncy House campaign... Keep up the good work Gene....
Great series on upmixing music specifically Gene. Thanks. My favorite 5.1 mixes are of three well recorded live concerts: Eagles Hell Freezes dvd in DTS Surround version. Chris Botti Live with Orchestra and Special Guests in Dolby Digital 5.1, lastly Andrea Bocelli Under the Dessert sky in DTS 5.1
In my 5.4.4 System the DTX Neural X does the best job over all in the upmix to the height channels.
Thanks for the amazing content Gene !
Please do a video on how you acoustically treated your room . Would love to learn from this .
Yes it's long overdue. thanks for the nudge.
The next video is the most exciting to me and I can't wait to hear you compare notes with Theo.
Techno Dad also took notes as well.
I really like the information you provide us Gene! I would like to see a comparison of older 5.1 or 7.1 up mixed with Auro vs Atmos using each type of speaker placement to see if there is a difference? A lot of us just don’t have the resources to try all the different formats and speaker placements like you probably can. Or does someone in your group like Don or Matt have different setups of speaker placements that you could compare the Auro vs Atmos? the information you are giving us is great and I would like to see it go a step further!
I enjoy Auro the most. It seems like the surround and atmos channels get more dynamic sound. I have enjoyed your website and videos over the year. Trying to get my wife to buy into getting the 13" Monolith subwoofer you review a couple of months ago.
Thanks for sharing Gene. Understandable you've tested music first and I look forward to seeing your review of movies too.
Your room is fantastic and your ceiling speakers are nicely set for Atmos. They are however quite out of spec for Auro, which makes comparing formats really difficult.
Re movies, as you've said before when an Atmos mix is immersive, it's going to be best played back native, so when testing please select some content that doesn't have a good Atmos track (eg, Aquaman).
Many thanks
That's a myth. The angular resolution of our hearing in the Sagittal plane above the cone of confusion isn't all that great.
The 30deg restriction of heights for Auro sounds like religious dogma.
My tops are wide dispersion and +- 20 degrees from MLP. This yields excellent separation of bed and height channels, better than I've achieved with front/back height channels in my old place with 8ft ceilings.
@@Audioholics Blimey, those are strong words. I agree that the separation between bed and height channels is better with the tops at +-20, as Anthony Grimani would recommend, and like you say, better than with front/back height channels. But Auro isn't trying to maximise the separation there, it's trying to link the two layers more. It is of course a different approach. If separation is needed, the Top channel is also available.
Thanks for the reply and continued research.
Gene, this is great work and fascinating to learn more about what the different upmixers are actually doing. What i have found is (whatever the format you are listening to), much depends upon the quality of the source material (you can't make a silk purse out of a pigs ear).
We are all looking for a theatre-like experience but because we have different room and gear set ups our individual experiences are going to be a bit different.
What bothers me about all the recent discussions about upmixing when watching movies, if the Studios and Blueray manufacturers hear this they may think it acceptable to produce everything only on 5.1 and assume we all use our preferred upmixer. In other words, they won't try for a higher standards of production in immersive content be it Dolby Atmos, DTSX or Auro 3D.
I really enjoy Auro 3D on my Denon 4700h from all my inputs especially PS5.
Great video, please do more of these comparisons! Is it possible for you to do an avr vs separates comparison?
Of course Auro 3D (native or upmixed) will sound rather odd on an Atmos layout. It just isn’t meant to be played on a typical Dolby Atmos layout with in ceiling speakers. So to me this is an unfair comparison.
That being said however, I do understand that most enthousiasts will have an Atmos layout and that makes this comparison justified indeed.
But maybe you should mention more clearly to the audience that Auro needs heights under 30 degrees to deliver a coherent sound field. Would be nice if you could A/B compare a real Auro 3D setup with a real Atmos set up. And then compare these upmixers… Thanks Gene!
That's a bogus cop out. My in-ceiling speakers are wide dispersion and +-20deg from the MLP. If Auro can't handle a slight alteration of their rigid 30deg recommendation, then it's a limitation of their format that doesn't exist in the 2 competing ones. I've done height/ceiling tests before with Auro and my findings have been pretty similar. Most people don't have the ceiling height to support front/rear heights while getting enough separation of layers from my experience.
Thank you for the dolby surround center spread suggestion. It's night n day.
You can also use your wide channels if you have a "wide synth" feature in your processor/AVR. It widens the soundstage nicely.
Hi Gene. Maby you should visit the studio at Auro, if you have the opportunity, and see how it works ! =)
I've been to Auro booths at CEDIA. I know how their tech works. thanks
You can't just turn off everything but the heights. You have to listen to the entirety. Auro preserves the front soundstage much better than DSU. But DSU sounds great, too. It's true, you have to listen a while before you adapt to each. Initially they can sound odd.
Nonsense. The DSU preserves front equally as well with center spread turned on.
@@Audioholics Disagree. It's strange, but somehow from the MLP, Auro puts everything up front in a big wall-like sound. DSU is too much "around" you even though the speakers are playing softer. Auro is like an audio illusion, but it works with music. I'm 50/50 when it comes to movie upmixing of 5.1 content. Rather just have Atmos.
@@erod9088 Really depends on your speaker layout, quality and preferences. My mains project a huge soundstage. I don't need more presence up front in my situation.
@@Audioholics So your position is based on having $70K front speakers? Not useful to 99% of people in the hobby. I have RBH signature speakers in my entire 9.2.6 system, but not not the top end models you have. Aurov wins most of the time with music upmixing. That's the prevailing opinion.
@@erod9088 No that's not what I said. You.often don't get good height separation in smaller rooms with low ceilings when people use towers as their mains.
I haven't seen any studies that prove Auro wins for 2ch upmixing. I suspect if any exist, they didn't engage "center spread" with the DSU.
I only know from my listening tests that Auro is NOT preferred for 2CH music upmixing by myself or anyone I've had over to give demos to.
Good job ole chap. I am impressed with your tireless regard in controlling for variables across A-B situations.
Question: Might your speaker sizes colourise your output /inherent enjoyment of how each format performed?
I have employ identical uppers and same-brand lowers (+ or - one upgrade level in the same bipolar speaker line).
Music upmixer pref. is DD
Movie / Action shows pref. is DTSX
We are so blessed to have a reputable scientific research engineer in our midst for the community...
God Bless and long health upon you and your household good Sir.
Yes speaker size can definitely have an impact as well as bass management. Personally, I always advise people to get the very best LCR's, those are the most important, especially if you listen to a lot of music. It's difficult to match height channels to really high performance LCR's as they tend to be large. Peace to you and happy holidays!
After your suggestion this week to turn center spread on for DSU on stereo music, I decided I like it better than All Channel Stereo. My Yamaha RX-A3070's manual suggests (at page 137) that setting only affects stereo, so I'm not sure whether my next question is meaningful, but is there any downside to leaving that setting on for 5.1 or 7.1 music or movies?
Heh Gene love your channel just got my Yamaha Rx A8A can you tell me how to change audio upmixes and audio stream.? I know you the A6A....thanks in advance
Thanks for the comparison and your thoughts Gene.
After seeing Genesis last night and watching 70 year old Phil Collins sing next to his 20 year old son Nicholas on the drums, I can now compare my immersive PPG arena audio experience to my home 2 channel and 5.1 Genesis sources with the various 3D codecs. 😁. Our 7.2.6 system is set up more for an Auro 3D layout with front and rear height’s so I’m guessing we will prefer that up-mixer a little more on certain songs. As mentioned yesterday the DSU was also preferred on a small number of Genesis songs over Auro 3D. Something that really stands out to us though is how hard hitting and focused the bass can be with Auro 3D over the other two codecs. I’m curious if you found this same experience with all channels active (vs just the heights)? It is quite noticeable on our system. Our family prefers this pronounced bass but that’s just us. Keep up the great work. LOVE living in this era of immersive sound technology. So fun to experience these 3D up-mixers as we taylor sound to our own listening tastes!
Auro definitely boosts the bass level which could be welcomed on Prog Rock music that tends to be bass shy like Genesis. On a well produced source, I found the elevated bass levels Auro causes to sound unnatural, however.
@@Audioholics Thanks for the reply Gene. Would you be able to provide an example of a well produced bass source where you found the Auro 3D bass unnatural? I’ll give it a spin for comparison testing based upon our listening preferences. In response to your feedback regarding a LIGHT bass progressive rock band like Genesis, I decided to test a HEAVY bass influenced rock band like Rush.- A Show of Hands album. We’ve seen Rush four times in concert and are pretty familiar with their sound to compare. The intro song (titled intro) of the three stooges begins to play and then immediately switches to the second track Big Money. It is a VERY hard hitting bass song in the first second. It’s actually one of our demo songs for when guests come over to highlight our system. (it never fails to garner a smile 😊). Using Auro 3D Auromatic you get that punch you’re looking for without muddling the instruments or Geddy Lee’s voice. With the DSU it’s just not hard hitting or effective enough for our tastes. Neil Peart is just not given justice using the DSU codec. The audience around you is reproduced effectively by both codecs and it’s very immersive but again that bass is lacking in DSU throughout. Try it. It’s very noticeable. Switch between the two. Maybe it’s my two subs compared to your four. OR listen to the last minute of the 6: minute 22 second track Marathon (#4). It’s home shaking bass and a great comparison song. For 5.1 codec comparisons we played the Blu-ray pure audio recording of Alan Parson’s Tales of Mystery and Imagination. The nuances starting with A Dream within a Dream with that bass “heartbeat” flowing into the Raven using Auro 3D seemed to be just a little more revealing with bass hitting harder over the DTS HD setting. Honestly both codecs sound excellent and it really comes down to splitting hairs and listener preferences as mentioned. If you don’t have this disc I can highly recommend it especially for 3D immersive audio. As you know Alan Parsons produces some of the best recordings in the industry and those Edgar Allan Poe songs are haunting with that constant heartbeat bass throughout; earth shattering sound effects with the Fall of the House of Usher; and very immersive as the background vocals surround you on the Cask of Amontillado. Would love to hear your comments. Cheers. 🍻
Joe really gave you a challenge. I like the StormAudio layout, it is very symetrical and an easy acces to all the program features. As far as listening , the ear does take time to adjust to new sources and the effects.
What challenge? If Joe likes heights and fake immersive, it's fine by me. I prefer what the pros install and use as my listening results align with that. I built a reference room to accurately review and test equipment. We have different goals. No worries.
What is the software you use to up mix your music? And which do you think is better for each situation when connected to a PC. Ie DTS X vs Atmos vs Dolby for PC games vs movies vs music. Which is best for those scenarios.
my pc runs an hdmi out to a denon x4200 and im thinking about paying the 200 for auro 3d or upgrading to the 4500h because even games that support atmos often sound better with neural x, im thinking auro 3d would sound even better
Great content Gene!!! Just one question, would a layout make a difference for the experience with auro 3d? From what I see in the auro manual, they preach the height channels and in ceiling for voice of god. Since all your speakers are in the ceiling, just like most atmos home theaters, would there be a noticeable difference? Thanks once again as I am contemplating on putting in ceiling speakers or height speakers.
On their layout its all about the wall mount close to the ceiling angled 30° to the listening position.
Both myself and other pro installers generally prefer in ceiling over on wall heights for Atmos. Since Auro has no native content, it's usually a good idea to support the layout that serves the content.
True, but no one has tested that. It’s true that you will not get AURO support based on Dolby’s layout for Atmos. Height usage is THEIR standard, so we are only to assume they have tried that.
I use an on-wall layout with front and rear heights at 30° angles because it sounds good with all the formats. Maybe not optimal for Atmos or DTS:X, but decent. Conversely, I had height speakers set for the Atmos layout and Auro sounded pretty bad.
@@TrueGenius On Sound United products, you can't use Auro unless you assign height channels, not tops. On higher end products like Storm and Trinnov, Auro still works for tops and sends the information to them accordingly. One of the biggest limitations with Auro, aside from no content, is their rigid stance on height speaker placement. If they would have been more accommodating on that aspect, they may have had a fighting chance to be a real contender.
Thanks for being fair with this comparison.It is a mixed bag, it depends on the mix of music or film, each title may be better in one than the other upmixer, the thing is to try everything, not just be a fan of one.I have tried movies where there is rain and sometimes there is no sound from the height speakers with Dolby Surround and with Neural X the sound is loud, in other movies the rain sounds good but with little atmosphere in Neural X and in Dolby surround you can hear the heavy rain and with ambient.
Awesome tutorial, but shane edges out the win with the trinnov surround visualization feature. I would buy up if the entry level AVRs offer the visualizer.
What ceiling speakers is Gene using that have the fixed baffle at 30 degrees? I bought four Infinity ERS610 on closeout (which cosmetically appears just like the Revel C760L) but now need to set up a 2nd system in another room. I considered the B-stock Elac Debut IC-DT61-W if they become available again. Andrew Jones did an interview several year ago explaining that a swiveling tweeter is a poor design choice which is why he designed his in-ceiling speaker with a fixed 30 degree baffle.
Andrew is 100% correct. I use Paradigm Elite 80-A angled inceilings for my family room and RBH VA-615L for the wides in my theater room.
Do 5.1/7.1 channel movies. Thats what people mostly use it for
Hi Gene, glad you are doing well. What a difference a year makes in health and wealth (from battle COVID-19 to sitting in your new hi-tech home).
Question about the results of the upmixing revolt against Dolby... did the change affect gear retroactively, or just gear that came after they conceded, and if it was retroactive, was the change addressed via a firmware update? I have a Pioneer Elite SC-99 from 2015, and I'm wondering if it too was affected by this?
Thanks and so true. I don't know what happened with Pioneer since they aren't' very communicative about stuff like this. The SU receivers lifted the restriction on new products after Dolby backed down. Legacy products weren't affected AFAIK.
@@Audioholics ok thanks for the feedback, and great content. 👍🏾
@@Audioholics 2019 D+M models were affected but received an update to restore the ability back in November 2020 & Onkyo/Pioneer AVR's that were affected by the cross-format upmixing restriction were amazingly updated the end of last year too which is saying something because of the absolutely dire financial state they were in, yet Yamaha I believe still has this restriction in place with their 2018 & current 2020/21 AVR series for some strange unknown reason according to their user manuals :(
Why don't you set auro level to 12-13 and then compare with dts/dolby?
Looking forward to Native Atmos vs Auro comparison :)
I find the auro effect too strong at 12-13, especially for 2CH upmixed music.
Guys, I always enjoy your informative videos! Check out "John Willliams Live In Virnna" blueray recorded in Dolby Atmos and "mixed in the extensive 9.1.4 format". It is on the Deutsche Grammophon label. Other audio listening formats include 2.0 DTS-HD MA 24bit / 96kHz, and 5.1 DTS-MA 24bit / 48Hz. It sounds great on my Yamaha RX-A3080 in 7.2.4. Enjoy! Joe C.
We have this version too Jo....totally agree. Fantastic source recording and the immersive listening experience takes this recording to the next level. Our entire family enjoys it as John Williams is our 26 year old son's favorite artist. Never get tired of playing it.
Is the software being used in this video, consumer available?
The Upmixers are from Dolby, Auro and DTS. The way I switch speakers on/off is internal to my Storm Audio Processor.
I think Dolby were facing a hefty fine in Europe, if they didn't remove the cross up-mixer restriction?
For me, center spread with Dolby was not enough: it helped, but still the center stage in music was anchored too much to the center channel. On the song "The Weekend" by Dave Rawlings Machine the singer is offset a little bit from center, and Dolby pins it straight to center even with spread on. This lead me to dumping the center channel altogether, which I haven't regretted yet, and it solves the problem with DTS as well.
Now i got to go home and do the same
Fully agree, much better in the native mix. You should try Yello - Point in Atmos
I didn't know there was Yello content in Atmos streaming. I will check it out. thanks!
Don’t bother with the streaming version get the bluray audio, I’m convinced it’s best example of Dolby atmos music there is.
Auro3d much depends on speaker placing. As you tested with surround and heights or tops. It should be verified with all speakers. And next subwoofer off it's not complete test. Auro is fine tuning all speakers for acheiving 2.0 sound image.
Been loving the back and forth between you and Joe. I find Auro interesting... But given how long they have been around and are still irrelevant from a native content standpoint, I don't know why anyone would compromise overhead sound by using their layout when doing x.x.4 just to support their "upmixer". And I say that as someone who has had an Auro layout in the past and now has closer to Atmos' mix room layout.
The auro speaker layout will work with atmos. The atmos layout will not work with auro.
I have a small sample size of movies I've listened to with both native atmos and upmixer into auro.
I will say, I have to put the blame on the people mixing the native atmos. But in quite a few instances, with disengaging every other speaker, except height channels, and I will say that there are too many instances of native atmos having zero sound when it should, or simply playing the musical score through the height channels. Not accurate in these instances at all.
In the same instances, the sound that is missing in atmos, often seems to be replaced with ambient sound and reflection using the auro upmixer.
I'm not exactly sure of the internal algorithm process, but in atmos tracks that are lacking, auro has done a very good job
@@danny51577 The Auro layout leaves too much of an angular gap above the listener in x.x.4. And if it puts sound in the heights that the sound designer didn't intentionally place there, it is not by definition "more accurate". There is more to cinema sound than what you think should be there, and mixers see those channels as an extra tool in their box. Not all of them will use them constantly... Or well.
@@TheReverendSlim oh I get what you are saying. The problem I have is when so uh nd should be there and isnt. Which seems to be the biggest problem with far too many native atmos mixes.
And the ones that decide to play mostly musical score through the height channels. That was obviously placed there intentionally, except last i checked, I dont hear music above me when walking around the grocery store.
In many of these cases, there are too many hands in the pot. I was just listening to an interview with an atmos mix tech, who was explaining that in his case, by the time the track gets to him, someone has mixed the lfe, someone else the 7 channel surround, and someone else the musical score.
I'm not a proponent of either speaker layout as a whole solution, they both lack in certain areas. But from what I have heard in my limited sample size, I am becoming a proponent of the auro upmixer versus even native atmos in more and more situations. Even in the case of having physical atmos layout and then lie to the avr about placement to get the auro upmix.
@@danny51577 If you want your room to sound like whatever room Auro measured, it is a great option. Just be aware that it is generating that height info, not extracting it.
Gene, I know it may not matter to most owners to D+M products but for some reason Sound United are still restricting Dolby signals with the use of DTS' virtualizer DTS Virtual:X, the Atmos Height Virtualizer known as the "Speaker Virtualizer" Surround Parameter setting on the other hand imposes no such restrictions with DTS signals, I suppose it was too much work for them to remove that part of D+M's cross-upmixing firmware code :(
I will look into it.
@@Audioholics Thanks Gene, that would be great as Sound United have been less than forthcoming about this imposed Dolby restriction on DTS' Virtual:X height virtualizer when I brought it to their attention last year back in June 2020 during a DTS:X Pro webinar with DTS' Glen Stone.
@@Audioholics Gene, I was just wondering if you had also mentioned to Sound United about the DTS Virtual:X issue with D+M AVRs that still imposes restrictions on the use of Dolby signals, Dolby's restriction policy has been abolished for around 2 years now so there is no excuse for Sound United to still restrict the use of Dolby signals with the use of DTS' Virtual:X height virtualizer, also it is truly baffling how Yamaha refuse to remove the Dolby/DTS cross-upmixing restriction with their current 2020/21 AVR lineup, that is very poor form indeed :(
@@Audioholics Gene, I was wondering if you had managed to inform your Sound United contact of the imposed restrictions on Dolby signals when utilising DTS Virtual:X, Sound United really ought to remove this restriction as it was abolished long ago, not sure why this cross-format upmixing restriction is still in effect when DTS' Virtual:X virtualiser is engaged on ALL D+M models since 2017 :(
I would like to throw down a challenge, to all you you-tubers. To find the best way to listen to “Godzilla Final Wars”
It’s a little silly, but I’m not yanking your chain, There’s allot to love in this movie but the soundscape needs some help, my best results have strangely come from maxing out my bass and treble. What it really needs is some dynamic range expansion, but I’m curious how the up-mixers navigate the tracks. I feel it’s prime reference content for examining up mixing and other audio enhancements.
My favorite scene is when Godzilla wakes up, spoiler alert, he’s muddaphuckin Godzilla!
Ya know what, maybe that’s a dumb idea. It’s not exactly an Oscar worthy movie. And the internet has been through enough already, Maybe it’s enough to say that a dynamic range enhancement feature or an “old movie mode” that auto detects DVD era audio compression, or screachy 1970’s tape distortion would be a sweet feature to have. I bet Ai and deep learning will bring some amazing new life to poor recordings and mixes.
i like to down-mix atmos tracks to mono then upmix to dts-x
LOL that could be the next TH-cam Influence fad you just started 🤣 😂
I agree with gene. That up firing speaker is very unnecessary.
It's not about the technology. It's all about the content and native sound formats! Everything else is "wash me, but please don't get me wet!"
Sincerely hope you don't screw up the movie comparison. The music comparison honestly is quite irrelevant to most people. As one of your harshest critic in your earlier video, to which i do apologize as i went slightly too far, I would challenge you to do your movie review on streaming services which most people watch new contents on now and really differentiate original 5.1 tracks and atmos track to demonstrate how Dolby is better (as I presume you would stick to your original case).
But Facebook says…..
O Gene, you are a national treasure
You are no longer listening to music you are more involved in your effects ,I listen to my music in old fashioned top quality stereo.These effects are great for well recorded DVDs.Unfortunately the titles are not great ,it’s all about effects not quality within the modern movies.I feel the equipment is getting better and content in the main is poor by comparison.You could spend a nice evening playing around with different combinations of effects rather that listening to the actual instrumentation and the musical abilities.
Auro 3D is bankrupt now