Audyssey DSX surround sound takes the speaker-count war to 11
You might think the future of surround audio lies in sophisticated DSP-driven single-box soundbars or even crazy wireless headphones, but Audyssey Labs knows the truth: what you really need is more speakers. Up to 11 of 'em, to be exact, as part of the company's new Dynamic Surround Expansion system. Like the 9.1 channel Dolby Pro Logic IIz, DSX focuses more on the audio in front of you, since that's what your ears are tuned to differentiate the best -- in addition to the left, right, and center channels, DSX includes two speakers mounted up high at a 45-degree angle, and two speakers placed farther out to each side to create width. Add in the two surround back channels from a traditional 7.1 rig and presto -- you're up to 11. Yep, that's a lot of speakers, especially if your loved ones already think a standard 5.1 system is an eyesore. On the other hand -- 11 freaking speakers. DSX-enabled receivers are expected to arrive by summer, just in time to close the shades and spend all day indoors watching movies.
[Via Sound and Vision; thanks Will]
[Via Sound and Vision; thanks Will]
No point having 11 speakers, since most television still stuck with 2.0 some are 5.1 (cable mostly) is only about 5-10% blu-ray actually has 7.1
This system is stupid. I proposed a system to Dolby Labs back in 2004 whereby each channel had a "location" number from 0 to 360 degrees and each sound was assigned a location number. That way you could program the amp and tell it where each speaker was (from 0 to 360) and it could support from 2 to 360 speakers (with daisy chaining)......
@junk
that would be damn cool. You could even add some sensors so it auto detects where the speakers are and adjusts accordingly (on the higher priced models of course)
you should develop it doncha know
Was that before or after you built the space shuttle and found the cure for cancer?
@ A_N_T_H_O_N_Y obviously it was after he built the space shuttle. He did that 30 years ago. 2004 is only 5 years ago. hey junk, you rule.
@junk
Wouldn't you need another set of 0-360 coordinates to designate vertical position and yet one more number to give you the distance from the viewer. So you would end up with something like (45, 30, 5) to tell the amp/receiver that the speaker is located 45 degrees to the right, 30 degrees up and 5 feet from the viewer.
By the time I can build a new addition on my house to use as home theater system, there will be liek 20.5 surround and then I'll be stuck having to build a new room cuz I was planning on using this 9.1 setup. (sadface)
5.1 is GIMMICKY ENOUGH... Most people will not want to upgrade (because even 5 speakers is already a reason for divorce)...
The whole many speakers drama is a solution for a CHEAP SPEAKER phenomenon. If your speakers could play truthfully to 20hz, you shouldn't need a subwoofer... and there's no reason for the center speaker, because it's right in the imaging of the front speakers...
All of these things are solutions to CRAPPY SPEAKERS, they're not here to make movies sound better (because BETTER SPEAKERS WOULD DO THAT), these technologies are here to make CRAPPY speakers sound DECENT.
According to this Surround Theory, you need a speaker in every point in space... It may be right, but it is ridiculous to implement.
@Pretol
You're way off on the subwoofer issue - in fact you're way off on everything you said. You can't just slap a speaker in an aesthetically pleasing spot in your room and expect quality performance. Anybody who's done any sort of FR measurements in their room knows that.
You can have the best speaker ever made sitting in front of you. If you only have 1 - I'll take my mid-range 5.2 setup over that configuration any day. Aiming a bunch of speakers from one spot and trying to bounce stuff off walls just doesn't cut it. Everyone has different rooms, and different needs and different budgets. There are TONS of great speakers out there - and all kinds of good equipment to go with it.
If you're not into HT audio that's fine. Nobody is forcing you to. Just don't pretend that you know what you're talking about when you don't.
I don't think you understand the point of a subwoofer.... good luck trying to feel the bass when you're watching a movie with your satellite speakers alone.
You obviously need 2 speakers in the front and 2 in the back. But what for a subwoofer? A good speaker can get down to 20Hz at high volumes, and sound better at that (unless you want to have an earthquake, of course). A good set of stereo speakers don't let you think the sound comes from the speakers, but create a big sound stage, with each and every instrument precisely placed. Close your eyes and you can hear where the sound comes from, precisely. You can point at every musician. Of course one speaker is not enough for that, but two good and well placed speakers are enough to cover the front completely, there is no need for 7 speakers and a subwoofer to do that. Pretol is completely right.
I think 11 speakers are quite difficult to place, especially with all those rules in what degree they should be placed, and they do cost a bit too.
i don't understand why there is no rear channel or fill of any sort. seems like sound would be very front biased.
There are two rear channels. LS and RS are "Left Surround" and "Right Surround"
The reason they are increasing the number of speakers in front of you is because you are able to perceive sound direction MUCH better from sound that's in front of you.
It's the shape of your ears. Your ears pick up sound in front better than sound in back. When sound is behind you, your sense of where it is coming from directionally, is not nearly very accurate. That's why there's only two rear speakers.
The speakers in red are what this system ADDs. So you still have the 2 rear speakers that are standard with 5.1 :-/
i meant speakers directly behind you, as in a 6.1 configuration. I have a dipole 6th channel dead-center-rear speaker in my setup, and i love it... I think what it helps the most with is sound that is supposed to move above you.
Trent, the article says that the 2 surrounds are optional. The system actually supports 11.1. The 9 shown above and the other two surrounds.
gotcha, missed that the first time around.
Lets just get it over with and make it 360.1
And while we're at it, lets release Mach 10 for even closer shaving.
360.30
Maybe not for movies, but you might be surprised how good Mono sounds. Most live music I've seen has the performers on stage, right in front of you, playing on the same stage. Aside from massive arena productions like Pink Floyd, how many bands actually create left/right or surround channels for live shows?
/has a dedicated two-channel set, as well as a surround sound for movies.
My old roommate was a hardcore audiophile, and our living room had a ridiculous stereo with thousands of watts, 9.2 surround, etc etc.
I moved and at my new place I'm using the tv speakers with an extra boombox to kick out the jams. There must be a difference of about $5,000 in the value of the stereo systems, and I really don't feel like I'm missing out on anything.
Having a tin ear can be a real blessing.
Yamaha has been doing a similar thing for a few years now by adding "presence speakers"
http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=41243
This seems like a ridiculous road to keep going down for realistic audio, inevitably leading to hundreds of encapsulating speakers around you and your home theater. not to mention the fact that no movie will take advantage of every speaker.
Whu not take the concept further and add speakers above your head and below your feet, for a full sphere?
over. kill.
Those Audyssey DSXs look like the Pizza Hut logo.
I can't speak for ninjas, but I personally can't pinpoint an audible noise in real life as precisely as these speakers are arranged. Think about being in the woods and hearing a noise in the distance without having a visual. I think the current 7.1 arrangement is satisfactory to emulate isolated human audible precision, especially with effective level mixing. Maybe a speaker right over your head would be beneficial though. You know, for UFO abduction sequences.
Unless there's something wrong with you, humans (and you should be able to) can detect location by ears a lot better than most speakers can portray it. Direction and distance... You can set up an experiment, close your eyes, and have someone in the room walk around you and make noises in different locations, you'll be surprised how well you can pinpoint where/what/etc is happening (MUCH BETTER THAN ANY SPEAKER SYSTEM CAN IMAGE).
First, there are already other companies out there implementing 11.2 surround sound technologies (can't remember the name of the first movie or the company that pioneered the technology, but I know the individual responsible for the first soundtrack had worked with George Lucas (but of course) - Yamaha and Pioneer to name just a couple.
Second, if you think that you have difficulty, for example, localizing sound in the woods or urban area, it's due to the many reflections and deflections that a sound traveling through such an environment (or the complex scene/landscape in a movie) goes by/through before reaching your ear. What sound designers are trying to (aside from taking more money out of our pocket) is to most accurately recreate through the use of additional speakers/channels is the natural audio environment that you would experience in the real word (or the audio immersion effect intended by the director).
Third, just because a move soundtrack is not discrete (i.e. 7.1 soundtrack with an 11.2 HT) in terms of matching your audio setup doesn't mean the receiver or surround sound processor can't take advantage of the additional amplifier/speaker channels in recreating the natural (as best as possible) audio environment. Of course, many audiophiles (if not all) would say this is sacrilege - who cares, they prefer stereo anyway for their precious vinyl and now defunct super audio cds or whatever, the vast majority of us (and the friends we plan to entertain) much appreciate the cool totally immersive surround sound effect that these type of processing units/speaker setups provide.
fyi... I don't particularly care for the format/setup presented by Audyssey, buy I do see why such a system would be appeal to those individuals who prefer very localized/direct sound as opposed to ambient/reflected sound.
Wha?
Just go outside if you need audio that realistic.
I don't think people want more speakers. I like the idea and would have to hear what the sound effects sound like. The room and the materials around the speakers have a greater effect on the overall quality. Find sound absorbing materials and it will improve audio quality.
http://jamesmsingleton.com
This is so much fail.
11-channel DTS-HDX quadromillion.1 hyper-surround w/ truaccoustics shenstabilizers. Fire the photon missiles!
Too many goddamn standards. I will be sticking with my six-year-old Cambridge Soundworks 5.1 channel DTS/Pro Logic II receiver (with digital coax in) for much of the foreseeable future.
In the not too distant future it may be less expensive to just pay the movie studio to redo the move live, in your home.
Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven.
Exactly!
Who wants to put their name down to buy the Audyssey DSX "None More Black" Limited Edition?
It comes in a plain black box.
This would make a great gift for a kid cousin or something.
Regifting: a recession antidote.
booo wrong thread.
but hey, if you can afford it why not 11? seems like as good a number as any. In the mean time i'm gonna save money and buy the previous standard which will sound just as good as it did when it was released.
Enough of this scheise. High quality, properly adjusted 5.1 system is more than enough in HT environment.
You just can't keep up!
I just added a receiver to my system for HDMI switching and to gain some of the new audio formats. My old receiver still works and I am now just using it as an amp, I enjoyed how it drove my speakers, so why mess with the recipe? I will be upgrading my speakers as soon as I can and I doubt I will be going to a full 7.1 system, I am just not sure I see the point. I have spent time listening to 5, 6 and 7 speaker systems at my local HT shop and just haven't notice any real difference. Quality speakers and their placement (Audyssey Dynamic EQ and the like have done a good job making up for this) are the most important part. you should be spending the majority of your budget on your speakers as they are the link in the chain that will have the most effect on the sound and its quality.
I do like the idea of more speakers up front though. I firmly believe a good 3.1 (Left, Center and Right) setup is better than a medicore 5.1, 6.1 or 7.1 system as they are the most important speakers and where all the sound comes from. This just enhances those important speakers by putting more of them where it really matters. But in the end, I think it is overkill.
That makes more sense than the current 7.1 arrangement, and is more likely to be properly implemented than the current 7.1 system that piles all the speakers up around the back and sides of the room; speakers everywhere but in the direction the director has the camera pointed.
That said, we continue to add speakers and the requsite channels of amplification with no regard for the impact that has on the quality of each channel in a consumer's system. Anybody who's listened to a Blu-Ray through a top-notch stereo system understands what focusing resources on inproving the quality of the first to channels can do for the consumer's movie experience. Not to say that multi-channel surround doesn't do some great things, in fact it can be awesome. However, we are asking consumers to buy into a more-is-better philosophy because it's an easier sell than better-is-better.
Consumers are still feeling the burn from the previous generation of pre-pro's that were sold as "future proof" because they could handle new codecs via firmware updates. Then we came to them with HDMI and said," that pre-pro you bought a year or two ago is a now a multi-thousand dollar boat anchor."
I'm no luddite; I am all for progress and this system is clearly the ne plus ultra for multi-channel audio. I just wonder if this is the answer to question that consumers aren't yet asking.
I've got a fever... and the only prescription... is more speakers!
Can't wait to hear Dark Side of the Moon on this bad boy!
9.1 = 11?
I've seen (heard...) NHK's Ultra HD system use 22.2 sound. (at NAB last week). Can't wait for someone to build a receiver for that!
I suppose none of you have heard of NHK's Super High Vision Standard of 8k television and 22.2 Surround Sound then? It's awesome.
So is this gonna make my mono LP records sound better?
Yamaha RXZ11 has already been doing 11.2 This is nothing really new. Now getting your source media in 11.2 is a whole nother dilema
So instead of talking about what Audyssey does (which is very cutting edge and impressive), Engadget gets snarky as usual with the speaker count. How about adding something of value, like what Audyssey is bringing to the table that is different even if most of us don't have the space for 11 speakers? And while you're at it, how about getting a raise so you can stop whining about stuff out of your price range - those comments get tiring too since it's up to your readers to decide what's too expensive or not. Love the site otherwise.
Yeesh. I don't get the resistance here. Nobody's forcing you negative nancys to buy it.
For those that want it - it's there. I say the more they can do to bring the theater (or even real-life) experience into the home, the better. I have a 7 channel unit now with only room and budget for 5 speakers. So what? It didn't really cost any more. I will eventually add the other 7 channels - but I don't really have any 7 channel content yet.
To Audyssey, Yamaha, THX - et al - if you can make my home theater experience even better than it is - GO FOR IT! I won't guarantee I will pay - but more options is better than less. And when the day comes that I am ready to upgrade - you can bet I will be excited at all the different options available.
I see 10. Well, 9 + the sub I imagine is included. Still 10. Am I missing one somewhere?
Confirmed Their website says 10 as well.