Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile

    The Digital Side Of My Immersive Atmos Music System

     

     


    The digital front end of my Atmos music system can be a little confusing for many audiophiles. I completely understand the confusion. This system is a bit different from the norm, but I believe it produces results that are a bit different from the norm as well. As one can see in my recent objective and subjective review of the system, it's capable of amazingly high quality. Here is a more detailed look at what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. 

     

     

    Atmos Music Done Right, Or At Least Right For Me

     

    The digital side of my Atmos music system can be separated into three pieces, music servers, Audio over Ethernet, and audio hardware. Each of these items will likely be addressed in an article or two later, but a detailed overview is due first. Also, keep in mind that being on the cutting edge of anything often requires a little more work, but it's absolutely worth it in this case. Those uninterested in putting in the effort, can always user easier methods without any judgement from me. Whatever works for you, is all good.

     

    I also have a note below about where this "should" go in the future to make it even more accessible, easier to implement, and if possible, even more enjoyable.

     

    Here's a simplified diagram of the digital side of my Atmos system.

     

     

    System Diagram.jpg

     


     

    My Atmos Music Servers

     

    I play all my Atmos content from two music servers, one running macOS 12.5, the other running Windows 11. I have an Aurender that also plays my 12 channel files, but given the company's current workload and priorities, I don't believe this feature will see the light of day anytime soon. 

     

    Why use a music server rather than an AppleTV or NVIDIA SHIELD? Using a music server enables me to use state of the art convolution for room correction for the best sound quality, enables me to use a variety of music playback and library management applications and their iOS/Android remote control apps, and enables me to NOT use HDMI in any part of the playback chain.

     

    Room correction / DSP on a music server is more capable than anything available from a hardware processor. Hang Loose Convolver enables me to use 65,000 tap FIR convolution filters for time domain and frequency domain room correction. These filters are designed by Mitch Barnett, using the state of the art software Audiolense. The most advanced multichannel processors use roughly 4,000 taps. According to Mitch, when writing about my system, "We use Audiolense’s time domain (i.e. excess phase) correction capabilities at low frequencies to shape the timing response towards the ideal minimum phase response. This time domain correction is what makes the bass clear sounding. It is one thing to smooth the frequency response for even sounding bass, but quite another thing to have clear bass, which is what FIR filtering (with independent excess phase correction) has to offer over all other room correction filtering technologies. This is in addition to the FIR filters superior frequency resolution with 65,536 filter taps which is the equivalent to a graphic equalizer with 32,768 eq sliders. That is 1000 times the frequency resolution compared to a 31 band graphic equalizer.

     

    Mac - MacBook Pro (15 inch, 2017) with an Intel Core i7 3.1 GHz quad core CPU, 16 GB LPDDR3 memory, and a 1 TB NVMe solid state drive. I use the Mac to play Atmos music a few different ways. 

     

     

    • Streaming Atmos music from Apple Music. Apple Music on this Mac outputs audio into Hang Loose Convolver, which sends audio out of the Mac. Apple Music streams lossy Atmos using the Dolby Digital Plus JOC codec, but for many album, this is the highest quality every released. I encourage everyone to listen to Elton John's Rocket Man streaming in Atmos from Apple Music. It's a fantastic experience
    • Playing local lossless TrueHD Atmos files I've either purchased/downloaded or ripped from Blu-ray. I use both Audirvana Studio and JRiver Media Center 29 for these lossless 12 channel WAV files. Audirvana uses Hang Loose Convolver as a plug-in for room correction. JRiver has its own convolution engine, enabling me to use the same filters as I use in Hang Loose convolver. 
    • Playing local TrueHD Atmos files through the Dolby Reference Player. This is the only way to decode TrueHD Atmos files on a computer. I set the Dolby Reference Player to output to Hang Loose Convolver, just like Apple Music, for room correction before the music is sent to the rest of the system. 

     

    Astute members of the Audiophile Style community are likely wondering how I can use Audirvana and JRiver, if the Dolby Reference Player is the only way to decode TrueHD Atmos files. I setup a process whereby I use the Reference Player to convert all my TrueHD Atmos albums into 12 channel WAV files, playable by any application capable of playing 12 channel WAV files. I convert into 12 channels because my system is 7.1.4, or 12 channels. They can be converted into other configurations such as 5.1.2, 9.1.6, etc... the same way. The conversion takes time as it's a realtime process, but it run unattended, so I don't even have to be awake while it's running. 

     

     

    Apple Music HLC MCH.png

     

     

     

    Windows - Custom built CAPS Twenty music server, written about extensively here.

     

     

    • Playing local lossless TrueHD Atmos music files with JRiver and Audirvana. Much the same as I do with my Mac, and others do with stereo files, I'm playing 12 channel WAV files and using the iOS apps for remote control. Convolution works the same way, either through Hang Loose Convolver or built-in convolution engine in JRiver. 
    • External Upsampling with HQPlayer. My CAPS Twenty PC has quite a bit of power, so I can use it for upsampling my 12 channel files to high rate PCM or DSD in HQPlayer. HQP also has its own convolution engine that will handle my filters designed by Mitch Barnett. This is an avenue I've yet to fully pursue, but I look forward to jumping in with both feet. The benefits of upsampling have been heard for decades inside "every" DAC, in products such as dCS upsamplers, and in software such as HQPlayer. 

     

     

    Audirvana.jpg

     


    Future Simplicity - Mac and Windows are incredibly flexible and can be installed on relatively inexpensive hardware. However, this is a double-edged sword. Incredibly flexible can also mean instability and complexity. Inexpensive hardware is nice, but it isn't the height of living for audiophiles. Does anyone remember the MacBook Pros with the keyboard and specific USB ports on the same bus, enabling a nice pop and click once in a while while trying to listen and type at the same time? What a feature :~)

     

    The future of TrueHD Atmos playback can follow the template already set by high end music server manufacturers, for high resolution two channel audio. For example, an Aurender could have a built-in software Dolby TrueHD Atmos decoder for playing play lossless TrueHD Atmos music files, outputting via Ravenna to systems with 16 channels. Trinnov already does software TrueHD decoding, so it isn't a reinvention of the wheel. Plus, the only changes to existing servers are all in software. This could mean many units in existing audio systems are upgradable for TrueHD Atmos playback. 

     

    Let me make clear, this is my vision of how I hope music servers progress, not related to anything manufactures and I have discussed. I hope they all implement it tomorrow though. 

     


    Audio Over Ethernet


    Tying my music servers and digital audio hardware together is Ravenna. It's an AES67 compatible technology for sending audio over Ethernet. An in-depth discussion of AES67 and Ravenna can be heard in my 2017 interview with Merging Technologies' Dominique Brulhart here.

     

    Ravenna equals freedom and quality when it comes to audio playback. Sending audio via Ravenna around the network, and even around the world, is rock solid. Ravenna was designed to handle high PCM and DSD sample rates, extreme channel counts, and very low latency. It's the standard that should've been used in audiophile products years ago, rather than the most non-standard standard that is UPnP/DLNA.

     

    Ravenna is used to record live performances of full symphony orchestras, where there are no second chances. I think it's robust enough for even the highest of audiophile expectations. It works with macOS, Windows, and Linux, which means almost any music server is capable of sending audio via Ravenna. Most high end music server manufacturers have yet to enable Ravenna, but Aurender has supported it for years. 

     

    Note: I frequently play 12 channel DXD music in 24 bit / 352.8 kHz WAV files, without a single hiccup. Morten Lindberg at 2L recently started selling his DXD discreet 12 channel WAV files, and there's absolutely nothing like them. No decoder is necessary to play them as they aren't encoded like TrueHD 24/48 files for Atmos. 

     

    Using Ravenna I completely avoid using HDMI in/output anywhere in my system. I also gain the ability to use different dedicated DACs rather than route my audio through an AV processor. Even if a DAC doesn't support Ravenna with an Ethernet input, devices are available that convert Ravenna to AES/EBU for output to a more traditional DAC or group of DACs depending on how many channels are needed. 

     

    On Windows, Ravenna uses ASIO and works just like any two channel audio device that supports ASIO. On macOS it uses Core Audio and is seen in Audio MIDI Setup, just like any two channel audio device connected to a Mac. 

     

    Ravenna is an open standard without a proprietary license, but manufacturers who've implemented it usually require their hardware for it to work or they sell their implementation of Ravenna on its own. For example, Merging Technologies sells its Virtual Audio Driver / AES76 / Ravenna for Mac here - https://www.merging.com/products/aes67-vad

     

    Recapping the digital part of my Atmos system thus far, I use a MacBook Pro or Windows 11 computer, running Apple Music, Audirvana, and JRiver, with room correction and Dolby TrueHD Atmos decoding, outputting audio over Ethernet via Ravenna. Now for the digital audio hardware. 

     


    Digital Audio Hardware

     

    Anubis.jpgI'm using two pieces of digital audio hardware in my system, both from Merging Technologies, an Anubis Premium and a HAPI MKII with two DA8P digital to analog converter cards in its slots. 

     

    Anubis - I use the Anubis like a digital to digital preamp. Audio is sent from my computer via Ravenna to the Anubis. I setup two 7.1.4 12 channel sources on the Anubis, and I can switch between them just like switching inputs on a preamp. One for my Windows PC and the other for Mac. The Anubis is extremely flexible, as software defines everything other than the physical in/outputs visible on the hardware. The only wire going to my Anubis is a single Ethernet cable that simultaneously power the unit and sends/receives Ravenna audio over Ethernet. 

     

    My favorite part of the Anubis is its volume control. The unit sites right next to my listening chair, giving me easy access to switch inputs and spin the large volume dial for fine r coarse adjustments. There's even a nice mute button on the top for immediate silencing of the music. 

     

    Music goes into the Anubis, then out from the Anubis to the Merging HAPI MKII. Again, all over Ethernet using Ravenna, without any loss of quality and very low latency. The HAPI MKII is setup as a DAC only, with its volume dial set to maximum. HAPI MKII uses ESS ES9028PRO DAC chips and has dynamic range of 125 dB (> 127 dB A-weighted), THD+N in excess of - 116 dB, with new local low phase noise oscillator circuitry. 

     

    HAPI MKII-02.jpgThe system can play 16 channels up through DSD256 and PCM at 32 bit / 384 kHz. The HAPI MKII also has a built-in 8 channel AES/EBU output, for people who want to use other DACs to do conversion. A four channel system with a couple dCS DACs could be amazing. In that case, the Anubis isn't even necessary, as audio could route directly from a computer to the HAPI MKII, and out from there to the DACs with volume control. The HAPI MKII features its own volume control, but it's only via the physical front panel knob. A bit inconvenient for us audiophiles. 

     

    After the HAPI MKII converts the audio to analog, it's off to the amps, and an article for another time. 

     

     

     

    Wrap Up

     

    At first blush this system appears complicated. However, I've done all the legwork and know what works and what doesn't. Most people can also use a single music server and an iPad for playback. I have to use everything because I have to understand how it all works and test it, so I can write about it. 

     

    The easiest route to Atmos music is to use something like an NVIDIA SHIELD with a hard drive full of MKV files, connected to a processor like a Lyngorf MP-40 or Trinnov Altitude16. For most people, this is all they'll need and it can double as a home theater processor. I'll write more about this option at a later date. 

     

    As an audiophile who loves music and understands technology, I had to implement the best system I could put together. This involved a mix of consumer and professional software, state of the art digital signal processing, and professional hardware. A system like this doesn't exist as a package or from a traditional high end audio manufacturer. Perhaps soon we'll see music servers and 12 channel DACs from our favorite companies, to play immersive audio. 

     

     

     

    To view the complete system visit https://audiophile.style/system

    To view my articles about immersive sound visit https://audiophile.style/immersive

     

     

    Listeing Chair and Anubis.jpg




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Nice write up Chris.

     

    The Merging stuff really is something special based on my own experiences as well. I've got a gripe or two about the HAPI I own but comparing only two gripes against the many times that number of gripes I've had with other DAC's that I've owned is barley even worthy of mention.

     

    The HAPI just works in the areas that matter most to me. Those areas being, Software/Driver Stability, Hardware/Stability, High Sample Rate capability over Multiple Channels via anything but USB and lastly SQ. In that order.

     

    SQ is very important to me but in my opinion Software/Drivers are where the rubber meets the road. Unfortunately many (most?) companies get this part wrong, especially over multiple channels at High Bit/Sample Rates. Merging has gotten it right more than once. So this is not likely a fluke. These people appear to know what they are doing.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, cjf said:

    Nice write up Chris.

     

    The Merging stuff really is something special based on my own experiences as well. I've got a gripe or two about the HAPI I own but comparing only two gripes against the many times that number of gripes I've had with other DAC's that I've owned is barley even worthy of mention.

     

    The HAPI just works in the areas that matter most to me. Those areas being, Software/Driver Stability, Hardware/Stability, High Sample Rate capability over Multiple Channels via anything but USB and lastly SQ. In that order.

     

    SQ is very important to me but in my opinion Software/Drivers are where the rubber meets the road. Unfortunately many (most?) companies get this part wrong, especially over multiple channels at High Bit/Sample Rates. Merging has gotten it right more than once. So this is not likely a fluke. These people appear to know what they are doing.

    Thanks @cjf  

     

    I’m with you 100% about everything you said. 
     

    More HiFi companies need to add Ravenna support, and Merging’s ZMAN module. If it works for 16 channels at 32/384 with very low latency, it’ll be rock solid for home audio. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Congrats for your complete Atmos 7.1.4 system!🤩 Can't wait for my Hapi Mk2 and build 12ch DSD256 environment. ASDM5EC -> DSD256 on Merging DAC the SQ is sooooo good.🥰

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    I've followed this adventure from the beginning but must have missed why you are so hell bent on not using HDMI ?? 

     

    color me curious

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 hours ago, bbosler said:

     

    I've followed this adventure from the beginning but must have missed why you are so hell bent on not using HDMI ?? 

     

    color me curious

     

    Hi Bruce, I've enjoyed your input and commentary from the beginning!

     

    I'm not hell bent on avoiding HDMI, as I will use it with a processor as a different way to play TrueHD Atmos for other articles. I mention the lack of HDMI in my system frequently because this is a big deal. For a decade HDMI was required to decode and play TrueHD Atmos. In fact, on most processors HDMI is the only input through which TrueHD can be decoded. 

     

    A system like mine that has no HDMI in the chain is something very new for consumers and opens up many possibilities. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Great article Chris,

     

    I am starting on my own Hapi journey.  Is the vol control on the front for HP or for the card output.  It would be terrific if I am able to control the overall volume otherwise in the absence of Anubis I am going to struggle I think.  My interest is primarily multichannel DSD.  I am a windows person.

     

    For those who are looking for a 16 channel switcher I got a solution thanks to Glenn Coleman.  Take two 7.1 units and control using a single remote.  Wire the units to a single remote using this

    https://www.amazon.com/Splitter-Adapter-Female-Keyboards-Electronic/dp/B09V7PLJVK/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=0DHzP&content-id=amzn1.sym.bbb6bbd8-d236-47cb-b42f-734cb0cacc1f&pf_rd_p=bbb6bbd8-d236-47cb-b42f-734cb0cacc1f&pf_rd_r=7X7NV05A40FX35H3SYQK&pd_rd_wg=vVTnf&pd_rd_r=f02021dc-27e5-4ec4-b467-2a953293c15a&ref_=pd_gw_ci_mcx_mi

    The remote switches both units simultaneously!!

     

    Once again thanks for the great write-up.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, Mantheunknown said:

    Great article Chris,

     

    I am starting on my own Hapi journey.  Is the vol control on the front for HP or for the card output.  It would be terrific if I am able to control the overall volume otherwise in the absence of Anubis I am going to struggle I think.  My interest is primarily multichannel DSD.  I am a windows person.

     

    For those who are looking for a 16 channel switcher I got a solution thanks to Glenn Coleman.  Take two 7.1 units and control using a single remote.  Wire the units to a single remote using this

    https://www.amazon.com/Splitter-Adapter-Female-Keyboards-Electronic/dp/B09V7PLJVK/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=0DHzP&content-id=amzn1.sym.bbb6bbd8-d236-47cb-b42f-734cb0cacc1f&pf_rd_p=bbb6bbd8-d236-47cb-b42f-734cb0cacc1f&pf_rd_r=7X7NV05A40FX35H3SYQK&pd_rd_wg=vVTnf&pd_rd_r=f02021dc-27e5-4ec4-b467-2a953293c15a&ref_=pd_gw_ci_mcx_mi

    The remote switches both units simultaneously!!

     

    Once again thanks for the great write-up.

     

    Thanks for the kind words @Mantheunknown!

     

    I'm happy to help in any way I can. 

     

    The volume control is very granular. It can control a single D to A card, both D to A cards, and the headphone output (for some reason it isn't visible at the bottom of the list in the photo). Here's a photo I just took for you of the options on the front panel. 

     

    IMG_5689.JPG

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/3/2022 at 8:17 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

    I mention the lack of HDMI in my system frequently because this is a big deal. 

     

    ah, that makes sense. Looking forward to your Trinnov adventures when you get to that point.

     

    Sound & Vision has an interesting article this month about Porcupine Tree's new album and Steve Wilson's take on Atmos. I don't see it online. I have the print copy. 

     

    also these are on line if looking for commentary on available content

     

    https://www.soundandvision.com/content/now-here-you-go-again-you-say-you-want-your-spatial-audio

     

    https://www.soundandvision.com/content/apple-music-spatial-audio-relations

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/3/2022 at 2:52 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

    I setup a process whereby I use the Reference Player to convert all my TrueHD Atmos albums into 12 channel WAV files, playable by any application capable of playing 12 channel WAV files. I convert into 12 channels because my system is 7.1.4, or 12 channels. They can be converted into other configurations such as 5.1.2, 9.1.6, etc... the same way. The conversion takes time as it's a realtime process, but it run unattended, so I don't even have to be awake while it's running.

     

     

    While the Reference Player should be a must, is it possible to replace Hang Loose Convolver with something else that also supports VST3?

     

    It's such an interesting project since we could also try that with Atmos tracks extracted from tons of movies while still preserving Dolby metadata, though not sure if metadata were still any good after upsampling them to 12 channel WAV files with PGGB-AP?

     

    (Obviously those files are gonna be HUGE but they could be losslessly compressed to WavPack format before we mux everything back into each MKV container.)

     

    Stacking multiple units of Chord Mojo 2 should be so much fun, I guess that JRMC might be able to keep all 768kHz channels in sync since MPD could also handle another similar (but different) task via ALSA / pulseaudio

     

    https://community.openhab.org/t/centralized-multi-room-audio-setup-with-mpd-and-spotify-integration/90890

    Quote

    audio in all zones is in perfect sync

     

    Pretty darn cool way to enjoy our favorite movies, assuming that even upsampled files would still contain Dolby metadata.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

    While the Reference Player should be a must, is it possible to replace Hang Loose Convolver with something else that also supports VST3?

     

    I'm sure it's possible, but HLC enables me to route audio in and out of it very easily and supports multichannel. Plus, support from Mitch is first rate.

     

     

     

    11 hours ago, seeteeyou said:

    It's such an interesting project since we could also try that with Atmos tracks extracted from tons of movies while still preserving Dolby metadata, though not sure if metadata were still any good after upsampling them to 12 channel WAV files with PGGB-AP?

     

    If converts to 12 channel WAV, what metadata would you need?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/3/2022 at 1:43 PM, bbosler said:

     

    I've followed this adventure from the beginning but must have missed why you are so hell bent on not using HDMI ?? 

     

    color me curious

    Because you can route your digital audio to the DACs you preferred and use very powerful computer to do the DSP. Traditional way (i.e. HDMI) won’t allow you to do that. Cool thing is you can even aggregate 4 or more 2ch your-current-own premium DACs for Atmos-TrueHD contents playback without buying any AVR.😁 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 8/6/2022 at 6:13 AM, El Guapo said:

    Because you can route your digital audio to the DACs you preferred and use very powerful computer to do the DSP. Traditional way (i.e. HDMI) won’t allow you to do that.

     

    "wont allow" ??

     

     I think you can do all the processing you want in a computer before sending it to a  Trinnov via HDM then output from there digitally to whatever DACs you want. Granted, if that is all you are doing then why put a Trinnov in the middle of it, but if doing other duties like the control center for a theater than I could see applications..

     

    In any case, don't shortchange the processing capabilities of the Trinnov as it does things I'm pretty sure Chris' current setup doesn't. I'm also not convinced that having a billion taps is going to result in the kind of improvements that it would imply vs. the resolution of Trinnov processing.  I'm also not convinced since I've had some pretty high end DACs connected to my Trinnov, that they are much if any better than the internal DACs.

     

    That said, the major advantage of the Trinnov is it maps all of your speakers in 3 dimensional space calculating not only distance but also azimuth and elevation. Since Atmos is object base, it can then calculate where an object is supposed to be in 3 dimensions and send the proper mix of signals to each channel to recreate a phantom image of that object where it is intended to be. After all, that's one of the major things we are striving for, placing aural objects properly in 3 dimensions. 

     

    Without that capability, to get things right you need to have your Atmos speakers physically located very close to the ideal in order to get proper placement of an object. For most rooms that is difficult if not impossible. I'm no expert but looking at the challenges Chris is faced with given the odd shape of his room, I'm thinking those speakers are not ideally located per Atmos specifications. He can correct for distance with his current DSP, but not azimuth or elevation. 

     

    I'm looking forward to his evaluation once he gets a chance to do it the Trinnov way. 

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, bbosler said:

     

    "wont allow" ??

     

     I think you can do all the processing you want in a computer before sending it to a  Trinnov via HDM then output from there digitally to whatever DACs you want. Granted, if that is all you are doing then why put a Trinnov in the middle of it, but if doing other duties like the control center for a theater than I could see applications..

     

    In any case, don't shortchange the processing capabilities of the Trinnov as it does things I'm pretty sure Chris' current setup doesn't. I'm also not convinced that having a billion taps is going to result in the kind of improvements that it would imply vs. the resolution of Trinnov processing.  I'm also not convinced since I've had some pretty high end DACs connected to my Trinnov, that they are much if any better than the internal DACs.

     

    That said, the major advantage of the Trinnov is it maps all of your speakers in 3 dimensional space calculating not only distance but also azimuth and elevation. Since Atmos is object base, it can then calculate where an object is supposed to be in 3 dimensions and send the proper mix of signals to each channel to recreate a phantom image of that object where it is intended to be. After all, that's one of the major things we are striving for, placing aural objects properly in 3 dimensions. 

     

    Without that capability, to get things right you need to have your Atmos speakers physically located very close to the ideal in order to get proper placement of an object. For most rooms that is difficult if not impossible. I'm no expert but looking at the challenges Chris is faced with given the odd shape of his room, I'm thinking those speakers are not ideally located per Atmos specifications. He can correct for distance with his current DSP, but not azimuth or elevation. 

     

    I'm looking forward to his evaluation once he gets a chance to do it the Trinnov way. 

     

     

     

    I don't believe you can do all the processing you want prior to input via HDMI to a Trinnov. Will it accept 12 channels of PCM via HDMI? If processing externally, this is what's required.

     

    I'm not totally sure you have accepted the non-Trinnov route, but the facts are the facts, according to Mitch, about my system "We use Audiolense’s time domain (i.e. excess phase) correction capabilities at low frequencies to shape the timing response towards the ideal minimum phase response. This time domain correction is what makes the bass clear sounding. It is one thing to smooth the frequency response for even sounding bass, but quite another thing to have clear bass, which is what FIR filtering (with independent excess phase correction) has to offer over all other room correction filtering technologies. This is in addition to the FIR filters superior frequency resolution with 65.536 filter taps which is the equivalent to a graphic equalizer with 32,768 eq sliders. That is 1000 times the frequency resolution compared to a 31 band graphic equalizer."

     

    Trinnov just doesn't have the horsepower to accomplish what an external computer does. When you say, "the resolution of the Trinnov processing" what do you mean? Roughly 4000 taps?

     

    The Trinnov azimuth / elevation measurements in Trinnov aren't going to get me anything I don't already have. If speakers are installed correctly according to the Atmos specification, then it's all about distance because the decoder knows where the speakers are placed. The type of system I'm using is often used to create this content in the studio. Suggesting that the studios can't do what the Trinnov does is a little wacky. It's all about math and specs. 

     

    You've previously commented about my speakers not being ideal. However, last time I showed you photos of the locations from the listening position, I also posted measurements of them which show textbook response. I followed the Dolby specifications very closely and I've stated this numerous times. What is it about this setup that isn't correct?

     

    I honestly don't think an AV processor is capable of achieving the results I'm getting, objectively or subjectively. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In case anyone is wondering more about how the Trinnov, with its own DSP, compares to a system like mine using Audiolense for DSP, here is a visual. One can see the Trinnov isn't even close to as good in several areas. Don't get me wrong, I love Trinnov processors and it's the go-to processor I recommend to everyone that can afford it. The Trinnov team is fantastic as well. Plus, when it comes to ease of use Trinnov can't be beat. 

     

     

     

    Trinnov top Audiolense bottom.jpg

     

     

     

    Last, here is the 7.1.4 speaker setup guide from Dolby. There is quite a bit of latitude for speaker placement, and as long as one is within the specifications, you'll hear what was mixed by the Atmos engineers. Nobody in the studio makes azimuth or elevation adjustments that can’t be reproduced by their own gear in the studio. They use the Dolby guidelines. 

     

    Home Theater Speaker Guide 

    BEST PRACTICES FOR MUSIC ROOM CONFIGURATION 

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    55 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    In case anyone is wondering more about how the Trinnov, with its own DSP, compares to a system like mine using Audiolense for DSP, here is a visual

     

    here is my left and right , I really don't see how it can get any better. The slight roll off above 2K and the slight rise below 100 is what the target curve is set at. Uncorrected on top obviously.

     

    curious.. what sort of peaks do you have uncorrected? It is hard to believe the Trinnov can't get the difference between 90Hz  and 180Hz on the green line any closer than 20dB.. something's not right

     

    Capture.JPG

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 minutes ago, bbosler said:

     

    here is my left and right , I really don't see how it can get any better. The slight roll off above 2K and the slight rise below 100 is what the target curve is set at. Uncorrected on top obviously.

     

    curious.. what sort of peaks do you have uncorrected? It is hard to believe the Trinnov can't get the difference between 90Hz  and 180Hz on the green line any closer than 20dB.. something's not right

     

    Capture.JPG

    You’d need to measure using an app outside of Trinnov and use far less smoothing to see apples to apples comparisons. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:
    19 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    You’d need to measure using an app outside of Trinnov and use far less smoothing to see apples to apples comparisons. 

     

    point taken, I'll give it shot if I can find my other microphone.. but that 20dB swing seems awfully big after correction

     

    . something still isn't right about your graph.... what is it uncorrected?

     

    Why can't your DSP correct that big dip where I drew the line and the Trinnov can yet the Trinnov can't correct a big dip a few hertz lower? And why do some of the peaks and dips correlate and some don't? The Trinnov shows peaks in both channels around 180 but your DSP in only the right. Granted, I'm no expert but the graphs just don't make sense. 

     

     

     

    Untitled.png

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, bbosler said:

     

    point taken, I'll give it shot if I can find my other microphone.. but that 20dB swing seems awfully big after correction

     

    . something still isn't right about your graph.... what is it uncorrected?

     

    Why can't your DSP correct that big dip where I drew the line and the Trinnov can yet the Trinnov can't correct a big dip a few hertz lower? And why do some of the peaks and dips correlate and some don't? The Trinnov shows peaks in both channels around 180 but your DSP in only the right. Granted, I'm no expert but the graphs just don't make sense. 

     

     

     

    Untitled.png

     

    That isn't a measurement of my room.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    That isn't a measurement of my room.

     

    please don't take my responses as being argumentative even though I see how they could be taken that way.. I'm just trying to learn

     

    so if not your room... what are we looking at ? I'm going to try and measure my room later this evening now that you've piqued my curiosity to see what I'm actually achieving

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, bbosler said:

     

    please don't take my responses as being argumentative even though I see how they could be taken that way.. I'm just trying to learn

     

    so if not your room... what are we looking at ? I'm going to try and measure my room later this evening now that you've piqued my curiosity to see what I'm actually achieving

     

     

    No worries Bruce :~)

     

    If I remember correctly, dips are kind of sort of OK, as long as they aren’t too big, due to how our hearing works. Peaks are more troublesome if uncorrected. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

     

     

    34 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

     

    I honestly don't think an AV processor is capable of achieving the results I'm getting, objectively or subjectively. 

     

    I'm not totally sure you have accepted the non-Trinnov route, but the facts are the facts, according to Mitch,

     

    No,  I completely accept that you have successfully created an immersive environment without using an AV processor, and I know that your computer is more powerful than one, However, there is more to it than than the number of taps. On the one hand we have an expert in DSP and room correction so all else being equal things tilt in his favor, but all things aren't equal because on the other hand we have companies  like Trinnov  focusing all of it's efforts on creating the ideal immersive environment.  I know you are convinced that your way is the best.. but until you compare the 2 ... you don't know . You are assuming... educated assuming, but assuming still. 

     

    SO  please don't think I'm saying what you are doing is wrong or not great or anything of the sort. No doubt you are experiencing a wonderful immersive experience. You have achieved what was heretofore not considered possible and can be rightfully proud of that.


    Next time I'm up your way I'll stop in for a convincing. If you come down this way you are welcome to hear what I have to offer, but I will say I don't have $60,000 worth of surround speakers so not quite a level playing field 😕

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am also very interested in the digital side of things.  I am finishing up most of my audio purchases for the year (the final one will be an SVS SB 2000 to give me two for my small listening room), and I now want to turn my attention to the computer hub or server for the entire system.

     

    I'm not actually planning to play Atmos or anything other than the legacy codecs unless some kind of breakthrough is achieved and the licensors of said codecs allow them to be decoded  from streaming apps on my PC and made available as LPCM streams for internal room and speaker correction, PEQ, software based crossovers etc, because that's what I do on my current Windows set up:  I take audio streams from desktop Qobuz, Netflix, run them into JRiver via its WDM driver where I do some PEQ,  Dirac corrections,  high/low pass and bass management for the subs, and channel routing to output the  5.1 LPCM stream via usb to my Octo DAC 8.   

     

    I'm looking to do the exact same things with a more capable new PC which will also be able to render HDR 10 bit color video to my LG Olded while performing the exact same audio functions and doing it with a silent PC.

    Ultimately I think I would like to do this on an M1 Mac Mini but I'm unsure how much of my software will run on MacOs and whether there exist acceptable substitutes for anything I use that a Mac will not run.  I know the Mac will run Netflix and output 5.1 DD+ audio, likewise Qobuz and Tidal, as well as Kodi, so all the streaming services appear covered.  Likewise it will run JRiver and Dirac, but not, I think, EAPO, or either of my two software based crossovers --Ekio and Dephonica.  

     

    So, basically, I need I need to know what very basic PEQ and software based crossover programs are available to run on a MAC OS, and I am not interested, btw, in something like Roon which would be overkill for what I'm trying to do.  Can anyone suggest something that might work?  I basically want high low pass for subs and PEQ, and I kind of want it to work seamlessly with JRiver.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...