HT in a small 10x12 room at around Rs 3.5L

[k-pad]

Four is better than two.
Of course.

So, this gives me a lot of leeway for front, but not much for rears.
The rear atmos I can not do anything beyond 25-30 degree without spoiling my viewing angle.
But I can mock a height speaker like the Dali alteco to act like rear atmos.

 

[k-pad]

Cool. It'll work fine don't worry.
Cheers,
Raghu

Thank you so much sir.
Am sorry if I am exacerbating things, but the moment I found your points, and saw @mbhangui experiments with taar, I realised it is not a thing for me today.
I will arrive at taar some day Of that there is no mistake
Thank you so, so much for always being there not only in the AV sense, but also in terms of first house advice and life lessons. You the best.

 

[k-pad]

Few in ceiling speakers will give ability to tilt tweeter. There are even fewer which allow woofer to be angled.
Tweeters are highly directional as their frequencies are higher and focussed.
So, you should be good with in ceiling speakers with aimable tweeters. Just check max angle supported and does it come close to your setup.

Tks, sir,
Am getting tillable ceiling speakers.
Angles are unachievable.

That's the grouse.
Regds

 

[rshri]

Have you finalized the non-height side and rear speakers yet?

 

[raghupb]

Thank you so much sir.
Am sorry if I am exacerbating things, but the moment I found your points, and saw @mbhangui experiments with taar, I realised it is not a thing for me today.
I will arrive at taar some day Of that there is no mistake
Thank you so, so much for always being there not only in the AV sense, but also in terms of first house advice and life lessons. You the best.

Use regular 2-core cable for now 2.5sqmm
When all speakers are set and some time in the future you are considering a cable refresh plan and procure Mogami W3082 from the US.
Cheers,
Raghu

 

[liverpool_for_life]

The rear atmos I can not do anything beyond 25-30 degree without spoiling my viewing angle.

Anthony Grimani actually recommends 30 degrees elevation for front and rear overheads. And, he says to stick the overhead L at the midpoint of L and C and the overhead R at the midpoint of C and R.

(Approx 32:30 onwards, H/T AVSForum):

For my setup (using the Seaton Ember 400's which are not angled), Mark recommended a 45 degree elevation and firing straight down for best results. I also set the azimuth to 45 degrees which got me close to the Dolby recommended .7 times room width criteria for spacing between the speakers in each overhead pair. I expect Mark's recommendation was based on my ceiling height (9 ft 2 in) and the fact that the Embers have very good dispersion up to 100 degrees and good off-axis response. He also has the Ember 630 which angles the 6.5 coaxial 30 degrees for use in situations where ceiling height is an issue. IIRC, you were planning on doing a false ceiling. In that case, I'd suggest looking at coaxials which are angled/aimable as your first choice. If that doesn't work, something with aimable tweeters.

In my own HT, after some tinkering (setting levels using REW pink noise instead of relying on my AVM 60 ARC calibration, distances, getting the mains wider and room treatment around the front overheads), I'm in a much happier place for Atmos than previously. Much, much happier.

More stuff has sounded wonderful in Atmos in the past week than it ever has until now for regular content (not just the well-worn demo worthy movies and Dolby's own Atmos demo clips) and I've had Atmos for more than a year. Dr. Brain and Suspicion (Apple TV+) and Fame Game (Netflix) have all had me thinking this week that it was well worth all this trouble (and expense) for Atmos. If you have any questions prior to your installation, I'm happy to talk. Good luck!

 

[k-pad]

Just check max angle supported and does it come close to your setup.

Had missed this point in the previous post.
Makes sense. Will do this.
Thanks

 

[k-pad]

Hi K-pad,

If you are liking the horizontal layout better than the vertical then better to settle for this kind of arrangement. The clarity may be due to lesser reflections from the side walls.

Thank you.
I too suspect, the side reflections arrive a bit later and hence do not bother.

You only need to ensure the horizontal dispersion on the the off axis is also good if other family members are sitting next to the mlp for movies or music.
This link from Erin's is a good link and pertains to the center channel only. But nevertheless a good watch for understanding.

Happy listening.

Regards,
Nitin

Mostly one person viewing, so the current M-T-M centre is pretty fine.

 

[k-pad]

+1 @Nitin K with horizontal setup the reflections are less.

@k-pad will be glad to visit you, I too have a horizontal setup and I agree there is a openness with the sound. This is due to less reflections.

Yes, same conclusion based on my experience.

I have a 5.1.2 setup at my place, if you want to listen to atmos you can head over. Also how the surrounds are placed, they are 6 feet away. Might clear some of your doubts too.

Thanks so much bro. Will PM you.

 

[k-pad]

What do you mean by horizontal? Do you mean using the center horizontally rather than vertically?

I say if it works for you then there are no issues, use whatever sounds best to you.

Best wishes

As in, the LCRs on the long wall.
I think them being a bit more farther from the side walls makes the final sound in the room very open.
Way more effective in a small room than the LCR on the short wall...

 

[k-pad]

Anthony Grimani actually recommends 30 degrees elevation for front and rear overheads. And, he says to stick the overhead L at the midpoint of L and C and the overhead R at the midpoint of C and R.

(Approx 32:30 onwards, H/T AVSForum):

Thank you, will check it out.

IIRC, you were planning on doing a false ceiling. In that case, I'd suggest looking at coaxials which are angled/aimable as your first choice. If that doesn't work, something with aimable tweeters.

Yep, false ceiling. All my shortlisted ceiling speakers are aimable.
The ones with only the tweeters pivoting are in the range of 7K (which is kind of my budget) to 15K. Fully pivoting coaxials are going from 25K to 30K... which is way too much for my budget...

More stuff has sounded wonderful in Atmos in the past week than it ever has until now for regular content (not just the well-worn demo worthy movies and Dolby's own Atmos demo clips) and I've had Atmos for more than a year. Dr. Brain and Suspicion (Apple TV+) and Fame Game (Netflix) have all had me thinking this week that it was well worth all this trouble (and expense) for Atmos. If you have any questions prior to your installation, I'm happy to talk. Good luck!

You are on the ball with this! Even with my 3.1, I notice the improvement in newer content. It's night and day...

 

[k-pad]

Have you finalized the non-height side and rear speakers yet?

Ya, Shri, two options in mind as of now:
5.x.x:
1. Just add a pair of MA Bronze FX, or:
2. Buy a Silver C350 centre and add another Radius for this config: L, R, SL, SR - Radius 225s, with the older 6th gen Silver Centre. (LCRs won't be timber matched, though, I assume the Centre will become beefier)

And rear speakers, whenever I add them, will stick to the Radius 45s.

 

[k-pad]

Anthony Grimani actually recommends 30 degrees elevation for front and rear overheads. And, he says to stick the overhead L at the midpoint of L and C and the overhead R at the midpoint of C and R.

(Approx 32:30 onwards, H/T AVSForum):

Crazy point! (Heights in between C and LR ) But sounds logical!
But then, why is Dolby giving out contrasting guidelines for pros and consumers?! Bonkers.
But what he says makes sense in a small room --- keeping the overheads in a narrower position and away from the sides makes sense logically....

As for the 30-degree point, might work in my room.

 

[k-pad]

So, adding a couple of more questions, after shifting things a bit tonight for a great (talky) movie (with great sound).

1.
Pushed the center 1 foot back away from the listening position (Speaker to LP became one foot more), and the sound massively improved without even redoing room correction.
So, here's the data:
Room length: 10 ft
Room width: 12 ft
Earlier (room corrected): listening position: 6 ft from L-R; 4 ft from Centre
Tonight (not room corrected): 6 ft from LR remained same, the centre got pushed back; so, LP became 5 ft from Centre.

Results: Audibility grew larger. Detailing became so much better. And dialogue became crisper.
Biggest surprise: SPL grew bigger (jumped instantaneously from 65 dB to 70 dB)

Reason for exercise: In new room, I would be pinning the Centre another foot back (6 ft; in line with L and R) away from the listening position, so wanted to check out how much weaker it would get. On the contrary, it turned out to be so much better.

It's kind of counter-intuitive, but am sure there is a simple explanation for this, but unable to arrive at it...

(pix attached:
File name 'Centre on sub': 4 ft from listening position (I thought it was best, but got scared it was too close to me, and in the new house, will have to be at least two more feet behind)
File name 'Centre pushed back': 5 ft from listening position (Halfway to final resting position; which will be one more foot deeper; But boy, the results were stunning; how?!)




2.
Sub crawl: Does it matter?
With room correction, what is important:
a. Nailing the sub position uncorrected, and then run room correction?
or
b. Run room correction for the best subwoofer position available in the room?

 

[liverpool_for_life]

It's kind of counter-intuitive, but am sure there is a simple explanation for this, but unable to arrive at it...

The integration of the center with your sub is better with the center moved back. In other words, if you were to measure center + sub around the xover region, you'd likely see a null in the old position that is much improved with the new position.

Sub crawl: Does it matter?

It's archaic and, with the measurement tools available today, really needs to go away.

With room correction, what is important:
a. Nailing the sub position uncorrected, and then run room correction?
or
b. Run room correction for the best subwoofer position available in the room?

(a) is preferred. By far. You really want to find a position for the subwoofer in your room that has no major nulls at the MLP.

 

[k-pad]

The integration of the center with your sub is better with the center moved back. In other words, if you were to measure center + sub around the xover region, you'd likely see a null in the old position that is much improved with the new position.



It's archaic and, with the measurement tools available today, really needs to go away.



(a) is preferred. By far. You really want to find a position for the subwoofer in your room that has no major nulls at the MLP.

Thanks, sir.
From where you started and where you ended, either I am crashing your home, or flying you down to my home if you have the time

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

As in, the LCRs on the long wall.
I think them being a bit more farther from the side walls makes the final sound in the room very open.
Way more effective in a small room than the LCR on the short wall...

Is this even a question? IMO always on the long wall in domestic use. A wise choice and you have seen it through empirical testing.

 

[k-pad]

The integration of the center with your sub is better with the center moved back. In other words, if you were to measure center + sub around the xover region, you'd likely see a null in the old position that is much improved with the new position.

Tried this again, and I think you might be on to something. It makes sense.

(a) is preferred. By far. You really want to find a position for the subwoofer in your room that has no major nulls at the MLP.

On to this now. Will post observations again after trying out few different positions.
Thanks much.

 

[k-pad]

Is this even a question? IMO always on the long wall in domestic use.

But what is the explanation?

A wise choice and you have seen it through empirical testing.

This, true. But again, struggling to understand why.

 

[Decadent_Spectre]

But what is the explanation?


This, true. But again, struggling to understand why.

I think it might be because you can place speakers further apart on the longer side which generally gives a wider and bigger sound, also the longer side generally means more distance from the side walls so less side wall interactions. The flip side is that since you are listening on the short side of the room then you have more issues from the back wall if you are seated close to it which is likely unless you have a large room where the short side is also more than 15 feet.