Poll: What's your current Atmos speaker layout?

[GOS]

Wow, this thread is awesome. LMAO!

 

[mandrix]

My assumption, they can't be as good as the mains.

That is good.

Yes, most Atmos seems to be delivered that way. I'm not a fan of streaming.

Sorry if you feel that I rant against Atmos. I have a right to express my opinion. Everytime I say that I listen to Atmos in 4.0 I feel that some of you have to attack me almost as if I've committed a sin against god Atmos!

I have always said, and you can look it up, everyone should listen to music the way they want to.
I'm not attacking you, I'm stating that you just don't know what you're talking about when it comes to Atmos with more than 4 speakers. You are the one making assumptions, not I, and that's what I call you out on.
If you haven't been there, then it's only an opinion derived from no experience. Plain and simple.

 

[par4ken]

If you haven't been there, then it's only an opinion derived from no experience. Plain and simple.

I have plenty of experience with ceiling mounted speakers and have found that they never sound right. Best sound is always obtained with speakers at ear level.

Which just gave me an idea for a speaker project. Build a very tall floor stander with Atmos height speakers near the top. The main channel would use the same type drivers mounted at ear level in that same enclosure. The tall box could be made as a transmission line for thunderous bass extension.

 

[PurpleMoustache]

I know most here frown on soundbars (and with good reason, most of them are crap), but since I’m living in an apartment with limited space to throw up real speakers I’ve been getting by with one. At my first apartment I had an LG SN7R, a solid entry level 5.1.2… with all corners cut possible as it was a model made exclusively for Costco to hit the price range of $300. Good for a first apartment, not good for the headaches it caused.

Moved to a bigger place, and miraculously nothing broke in the move, so I took the moving funds I put aside for broken things and put it all into what RT-ings, Wirecutter, et all call the “best Atmos soundbar on the market, hands down”, the Samsung Q990C, a mammoth 11.1.4 setup. I figured I wanted to upgrade to a 7.1.4, and while most bars at the range I was looking for have wireless (real) rear speakers, and bounce heights… none had any “real” sides… all projected. So I figured if I’m gonna have some projected sides no matter what… why not go all the way.

It’s been a massive improvement, a much wider sound noticeably. The wireless rears are each 3 way, doing the left and right rear, and the rear wides, AND the rear heights, while the bar handles LCR, front wides, and center wides from its facets, and the front heights on the top of the bar. And, notably, doesn’t have HDMI-CEC issues (muting on start up, only unmuting on its OWN remote), eARC issues (constant failures to sync with the TV, unless everything turned on in a specific order), and port issues (to make it work eARC I ported it through a shARC… which ate up its sole input port) that the SN7R had.

Highly recommend it for those who don’t want to/can’t commit to a full receiver/speaker set up

 

[barfle]

Sorry if you feel that I rant against Atmos. I have a right to express my opinion. Everytime I say that I listen to Atmos in 4.0 I feel that some of you have to attack me almost as if I've committed a sin against god Atmos!

To each his own, I say. As far as my own, I strive for “pretty good.” Matched speakers? Well, they are symmetric, so all my lefts match all my rights, but my backs cost less than my fronts, and my ceiling speakers are ceiling speakers, not bookshelves or floor-standers. But it’s pretty good.

As I’ve noted before, my ceiling speakers are in place, but have never been energized, simply because I haven’t been able to afford the equipment to do so. It’s about a four grand investment to get four more speakers running correctly. I look forward to the time when that happens, but if it happens next year, I’ll be surprised.

I would like to take advantage of every whoopdediddlydo that comes around the latest turn in the industry, but my budget is finite, and media is always chipping away at my hardware purchases.

Quad was delightfully cool when it came out fifty years ago. Stereo was delightfully cool when it came out twenty years before. Both are still delightfully cool, as are many of the mono records I own.

My quadio blu-rays play through four of my ten speakers. I don’t feel deprived while listening to them. My SDE recordings play in 5.1, and I don’t feel deprived listening to them.

If you have a single seat in your listening room, it’s entirely possible that a center channel is unnecessary for any recording. In my four-seat room, sound quality and balance is pretty good in all seats, and I feel that the front center channel helps that.

Again, I certainly hope to upgrade my electronics to Atmos capability sometime soon, and once I do, I hope to be amazed by about a dozen recordings I already own, and perhaps fifty that I will purchase in the meantime.

I’m the last guy to tell someone else what they ought to like. But the more I can get immersed in the sound, I usually am more pleased by the experience.

 

[hi-res_edition]

I listen to everything in 4.0.

I wonder how Atmos handles that... I highly doubt that there are many, if any, audio engineers that are checking the Atmos downmix in 4.0. Certainly 5.1 and 2.0. Your post just goes to show that there is a wide range of layouts used!

 

[ar surround]

I have plenty of experience with ceiling mounted speakers and have found that they never sound right. Best sound is always obtained with speakers at ear level.

Which just gave me an idea for a speaker project. Build a very tall floor stander with Atmos height speakers near the top. The main channel would use the same type drivers mounted at ear level in that same enclosure. The tall box could be made as a transmission line for thunderous bass extension.

When you say "ceiling mounted" speakers, do you mean those typical small round units that are cut into the ceiling? I've always thought that they wouldn't be appropriate in a system with big floor standing mains and surrounds, so I installed bookshelf speakers in the ceiling. The ones I use are the same as those that Purdue Radio matched to my big AR9s back in 1989 when I converted to a 6.0 system. I am happy with them (as long as one doesn't fall and kill me.)

I often wonder how an Atmos system would sound with small but equal speakers all around plus a subwoofer.

 

[mandrix]

I have plenty of experience with ceiling mounted speakers and have found that they never sound right. Best sound is always obtained with speakers at ear level.

Which just gave me an idea for a speaker project. Build a very tall floor stander with Atmos height speakers near the top. The main channel would use the same type drivers mounted at ear level in that same enclosure. The tall box could be made as a transmission line for thunderous bass extension.

Well no offense but you're off on a tangent again. I asked you once and now again: have you ever heard a properly setup 7.1.4 system with a good Atmos mix?
But if not I don't understand where you're coming from.
Again, ALL my speakers point at the MLP. People can hear sounds from all directions.
If you personally are happy with Quad, that's fine with me. But I think you're sort of tilting at windmills.

 

[John Svensson]

5.0

 

[ar surround]

Well no offense but you're off on a tangent again. I asked you once and now again: have you ever heard a properly setup 7.1.4 system with a good Atmos mix?
But if not I don't understand where you're coming from.
Again, ALL my speakers point at the MLP. People can hear sounds from all directions.
If you personally are happy with Quad, that's fine with me. But I think you're sort of tilting at windmills.

"...with a good Atmos mix..." Yes, we need to realize that this is still nascent technology. Remember how long it took for proficiency in stereo mixing (and quad) to be achieved?

 

[madscot]

When you say "ceiling mounted" speakers, do you mean those typical small round units that are cut into the ceiling? I've always thought that they wouldn't be appropriate in a system with big floor standing mains and surrounds, so I installed bookshelf speakers in the ceiling. The ones I use are the same as those that Purdue Radio matched to my big AR9s back in 1989 when I converted to a 6.0 system. I am happy with them (as long as one doesn't fall and kill me.)

I often wonder how an Atmos system would sound with small but equal speakers all around plus a subwoofer.

All of my speakers are the same, Mordaunt short Genie’s, in a 5.1.2 system and it sounds amazing, if I ever get the opportunity to move to 5.1.4 i’d be looking for another pair of the same, I bought them 2nd hand but they’re the best (and most expensive new) i’ve ever had

 

[mandrix]

"...with a good Atmos mix..." Yes, we need to realize that this is still nascent technology. Remember how long it took for proficiency in stereo mixing (and quad) to be achieved?

Well that's true but there are plenty of good mixes existing, IMO. My point was actually listening to one.

 

[par4ken]

When you say "ceiling mounted" speakers, do you mean those typical small round units that are cut into the ceiling? I've always thought that they wouldn't be appropriate in a system with big floor standing mains and surrounds, so I installed bookshelf speakers in the ceiling. The ones I use are the same as those that Purdue Radio matched to my big AR9s back in 1989 when I converted to a 6.0 system. I am happy with them (as long as one doesn't fall and kill me.)

I often wonder how an Atmos system would sound with small but equal speakers all around plus a subwoofer.

Over the years I've placed many speakers in the ceiling largely to save space, I've also mounted speakers on wall mounted brackets higher up near the ceiling. While the sound was OK it was not nearly the same as speakers mounted lower down. Drivers should be near ear level for best sound.

Those small round units always sound horrible, they were designed more for PA systems.

 

[par4ken]

I wonder how Atmos handles that... I highly doubt that there are many, if any, audio engineers that are checking the Atmos downmix in 4.0. Certainly 5.1 and 2.0. Your post just goes to show that there is a wide range of layouts used!

What works OK for 5.1 will work OK for 4.0!

 

[marpow]

When you say "ceiling mounted" speakers, do you mean those typical small round units that are cut into the ceiling? I've always thought that they wouldn't be appropriate in a system with big floor standing mains and surrounds, so I installed bookshelf speakers in the ceiling. The ones I use are the same as those that Purdue Radio matched to my big AR9s back in 1989 when I converted to a 6.0 system. I am happy with them (as long as one doesn't fall and kill me.)

I often wonder how an Atmos system would sound with small but equal speakers all around plus a subwoofer.

Your post is very thought provoking for me.
I have ceiling mounted, round, see picture. Adjustable tweeters aimed towards listenin position.
I did tons of research before I built my space and I went with those.
Over the last couple years I have read and seen lots of QQ pictures where members did as you did, smaller box speakers mounted on ceiling. As a contractor and very mechanical minded nothing scares me about changing things.
Now a couple years later, and I have thought this way awhile, if I had to do over I would do as you with my 4 Atmos speakers being box speakers. Of course what I have now is great and certainly not a problem, I hear them very easy, so not high on the "lets change this list".

All my 9 speakers are B&W. Reserched well and timbre matched. I am not happy with my two front floor left/right and thinking of purchasing new, but not B&W. Do you think if I went with another brand that whole timbre thing would be that critical?

I want to change my two front floor standers because i listen to a lot of stereo, they sound great when listening to any kind of surround as the other speakers fill the void, for lack of a better word. When I listen to stereo, they are really good sonically with definition, but it doesn't come out into the room, I know I can do better, and cost is a factor so in a state of indecsion now.

 

[zdjh22]

Both my listening room and my receiver (Denon 3600h) limit me to 7.1.2, and the “.2” are upward firing Atmos speakers on top of the shelving units on either side of the TV (so quite a compromise). Installing ceiling units and pulling wires is not appealing, nor the cost of upgrading that receiver, nor the cost of more and better speakers. Instead, I went for a virtual headphone rig (A16) that allows me up to Atmos 12.1.10, or any other configuration I want to try, for a similar cost to a much higher end AVR, more speakers, and lots of labor for rewiring. Further I can easily change brands and sizes of virtual speakers by using different PRIRs (B&W, Omega, Genelec, etc.). A to B comparisons between different virtual rooms, and between my physical room and the headphones, are easy and enlightening.

In my media collection, there are some albums that sound best 4.0 (no surprise many are quad mixes, even though some are SACDs that are 5.0 or 5.1 with or without phantom center and/or LFE), others 5.1, others 7.1, others the various Atmos, DTS, or Auro3D configurations. One (Who’s Next 50th) sounds awful on 12.1.10 (on Baba O’Reilly, the synthesizer bounces about annoyingly), but awesome on 9.1.6. On the 4.0 albums, varying the angle and size of the rears can make a big difference. “40 Years of Major Tom“ really really needs Atmos, and I can tell the difference between DD+ and TrueHD editions. In general Atmos on DD+ (Apple Music) sounds very good, and I appreciate the many mixes that are only available streaming, but whether it’s purely psychological or not the TrueHD versions (mostly physical media) sound better to me.

 

[mrcond]

I want to change my two front floor standers because i listen to a lot of stereo, they sound great when listening to any kind of surround as the other speakers fill the void, for lack of a better word. When I listen to stereo, they are really good sonically with definition, but it doesn't come out into the room, I know I can do better, and cost is a factor so in a state of indecsion now.

Those B&Ws you have are really good speakers, but they are known to require the right high-current amplification to drive them, something that can easily drive a 4-ohm or lower load. I have B&Ws as well, a notch or 2 down from what you have, and I am really happy with them as a stereo pair. My 2-channel amp is a Parasound with 275 wpc into 8 ohms and 400 wpc into 4 ohms. I'm not sure if changing amps might improve your 2-channel sound - what are you currently using? Also, are you able to move them out into the room a little more, away from the back wall? I believe that can help create more of a 3-dimensional sound field.

All my 9 speakers are B&W. Reserched well and timbre matched. I am not happy with my two front floor left/right and thinking of purchasing new, but not B&W. Do you think if I went with another brand that whole timbre thing would be that critical?

In my opinion, it is much less critical to timbre-match the 4 ceiling speakers to the rest of the system. I have inexpensive round in-ceiling speakers (not the same brand as any of my other speakers) and it always sounds great to me, never felt the need to upgrade them. Of course, I have everything bass managed to my 2 subwoofers so that the no bass is coming from above, only 80 Hz and above.

 

[marpow]

Those B&Ws you have are really good speakers, but they are known to require the right high-current amplification to drive them, something that can easily drive a 4-ohm or lower load. I have B&Ws as well, a notch or 2 down from what you have, and I am really happy with them as a stereo pair. My 2-channel amp is a Parasound with 275 wpc into 8 ohms and 400 wpc into 4 ohms. I'm not sure if changing amps might improve your 2-channel sound - what are you currently using? Also, are you able to move them out into the room a little more, away from the back wall? I believe that can help create more of a 3-dimensional sound field.


In my opinion, it is much less critical to timbre-match the 4 ceiling speakers to the rest of the system. I have inexpensive round in-ceiling speakers (not the same brand as any of my other speakers) and it always sounds great to me, never felt the need to upgrade them. Of course, I have everything bass managed to my 2 subwoofers so that the no bass is coming from above, only 80 Hz and above.

Thank you, good stuff.
For my stereo fronts I have the Mcintosh 2 channel C1 100 preamp and the 2 channel MC452 amp, no lack of power.

My thoughts (stereo listening) on my current B&W fronts, sonically they are great, good detail, where they sit, postion, etc a great triangle to my sitting area. I have done this and that, moved them here and there, way over focused, makes me sick when I think how OCD I can be at times.
There are two things that bug me, they are on the bright side, I have Tinitus, so really bright sounds bug me, like a singer or a guitar going to a top end bugs me. The other, as good as I feel they are, I tend to hear them at the speaker, yes I have good phantom center, all that kind of stuff, but I don't feel they come out into the room, as much as I would like. Of course I am being highly critical, but they are mine not anothers.
I have brought them forward into the room as much as I want, aesthetics are always important.
My evil thinking says, if you buy new fronts, you could move them to back speakers and use your current rears as side speakers and have a 7 speaker foundation.
I sincerely believe the two stereo fronts have to be the most important. What does Steven Wilson say, I start with the stereo and get that perfect before moving on to surround.
I also wonder/think that maybe I like surround so much because it is filling all the holes in my listening space.
Sorry, I am stuck down in the rabbit hole, need to climb out NOW!

 

[AYanguas]

I wonder how Atmos handles that... I highly doubt that there are many, if any, audio engineers that are checking the Atmos downmix in 4.0. Certainly 5.1 and 2.0. Your post just goes to show that there is a wide range of layouts used!

Atmos does not handle that.
It is the AVR processor which handles that.

It reads the 5.1/7.1 substream, if the AVR does not support Atmos.

If there is no Center speaker, it's Channel is 'merged' into FL, FR.

If there are not Rear Surrounds, those channels are 'merged' into the Side Surrounds of 5.1

If there is no LFE SUB, then the LFE Channel is 'merged' into FL,FR and, possibly, also into Surrounds, as my DENON does.

In summary, It is near like playing 5.1

 

[ar surround]

Thank you, good stuff.
For my stereo fronts I have the Mcintosh 2 channel C1 100 preamp and the 2 channel MC452 amp, no lack of power.

My thoughts (stereo listening) on my current B&W fronts, sonically they are great, good detail, where they sit, postion, etc a great triangle to my sitting area. I have done this and that, moved them here and there, way over focused, makes me sick when I think how OCD I can be at times.
There are two things that bug me, they are on the bright side, I have Tinitus, so really bright sounds bug me, like a singer or a guitar going to a top end bugs me. The other, as good as I feel they are, I tend to hear them at the speaker, yes I have good phantom center, all that kind of stuff, but I don't feel they come out into the room, as much as I would like. Of course I am being highly critical, but they are mine not anothers.
I have brought them forward into the room as much as I want, aesthetics are always important.
My evil thinking says, if you buy new fronts, you could move them to back speakers and use your current rears as side speakers and have a 7 speaker foundation.
I sincerely believe the two stereo fronts have to be the most important. What does Steven Wilson say, I start with the stereo and get that perfect before moving on to surround.
I also wonder/think that maybe I like surround so much because it is filling all the holes in my listening space.
Sorry, I am stuck down in the rabbit hole, need to climb out NOW!

On the brightness spectrum, I recall that B&W speakers are considered somewhat on the bright side. That is one of the characteristics that allows them to exhibit their excellent detail. However, detail seems to be inversely proportional to forgiveness, so the worse the source material the more pain for the ears.

Do your speakers have any type of attenuation switches for the upper range drivers? If you do not, I can address some other possibilities via PM, but it might be going down a rabbit hole.

Regarding positioning, in addition to bringing them further out into the room, have you tried moving them in from the side walls as well? I believe I recall you stating that your room is only 12 x 14 feet, so that may be difficult.

MLP: when listening to stereo, have you tried putting yourself exactly between the speakers with the drivers toed in?

If you listen to any kind of stereo after listening to surround the stereo will seem flat. I never go from surround to stereo. It’s like starting a listening session with modern audiophile recordings and then reverting to CDs of ‘60s AM radio hits. Cringe.

Like I said in an earlier post, achieving expertise In stereo mixing was a long haul. Try listening to APP Eye In The Sky and Steven Wilson stereo remix of Aqualung. Both of these stereo mixes should yield a wide (side wall imaging) and deep image.