Auro-3D - Speaker Layout Compatibility Update

Ooo didnt find them? Any tips

It's the 3D Strength setting that makes the most difference to my system. Currently it's set to 7.

Your Marantz has an extra Movies Preset compared to mine so you may need to try that out and see what you think. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Oh yes...blimey... originally the auromatic strength at 10 and preset was small
 

Attachments

  • 3EC69CFA-574D-42BC-A353-96A0F1E864DE.png
    3EC69CFA-574D-42BC-A353-96A0F1E864DE.png
    189.8 KB · Views: 151
Last edited:
Interesting link below, a guy compared Auro 3D with the Dolby and DTS upmixers.



That’s old, lots has changed since that review x namely DTSX pro which upmixes to all channels.

DSU also has a new upmixer, but is only on denon/marantz gear at the moment.

Cross mixing is also allowed again, although this depends on your processor.
 
That’s old, lots has changed since that review x namely DTSX pro which upmixes to all channels.

Do you know of any more recent comparisons? I don't even mean professionally, just some subjective views from forum members for example.
In my case, I only have the three upmixers in that link and not DTS:X Pro which is currently on the more expensive receivers and processors as far as I can see.
It would be quite interesting for members to go "oh I'm watching Superman 2 tonight looks like it may be best upmixed with --- for starters".
 
Do you know of any more recent comparisons? I don't even mean professionally, just some subjective views from forum members for example.
In my case, I only have the three upmixers in that link and not DTS:X Pro which is currently on the more expensive receivers and processors as far as I can see.
It would be quite interesting for members to go "oh I'm watching Superman 2 tonight looks like it may be best upmixed with --- for starters".
Personally I find neural x the most aggressive, but I leave my trinnov on auto which upmixes dolby to dsu, dts to dtsx, etc.

Honestly, they’re both so good you’re splitting hairs with movies, I personally am not a fan of Auro 3D other than for music where it is better than anything else.

For reference I have a 9.5.6 system.
 
Thank you.
I guess that, wherever there is a film review on the forum, people could comment in the discussion. E.g. "I found best in DTS:X upmix, added +1.5 to centre channel, lowered LFE -1" etc.
 
Do you know of any more recent comparisons? I don't even mean professionally, just some subjective views from forum members for example.
In my case, I only have the three upmixers in that link and not DTS:X Pro which is currently on the more expensive receivers and processors as far as I can see.
It would be quite interesting for members to go "oh I'm watching Superman 2 tonight looks like it may be best upmixed with --- for starters".
am running a 7.1.6 system it runs as 7.1.4 for atmos and upmixing anything with native dolby surround... though there is an upmixing option with DTS-X pro for 7.1.6 i dont tend to use,,

for everything else pcm to dts to 2.0 dolby am upmixing with neural X to 7.1.6 and really enjoying

auro3D i exclusively use for music eg old pcm2.0 concerts and such ...

ps note my 7.1.6 setup is 4 over head heights and then a Ts(VOG) and Ch(centre height) ti really take advantage of DTS-X pro and auro3D
 
For reference I have a 9.5.6 system.

Putting geeky hat on now, sorry. I get the 9 and the 6.

Some people say the middle number is:

a. Always .1 as it is listing the number of discreet channels or

b. Say if you have Sub EQ HT, you could say it is .2 for two subwoofers based on them being a separately EQed output (and are therefore different).

c. The total number of subwoofers.

I assume you believe it is b (as anyone can separately EQ as many subs as they want) or c.

Is there a written agreed convention on this somewhere or does anyone know the answer?

P.S. I'm not being critical, I'm just wondering for when someone asks me on the forum what my setup is :)
 
I thought c was the convention. It’s why I use 7.4.6 for mine even though my front and rears are EQd as pairs. I believe @mb3195 has four subs and transducers?
 
Putting geeky hat on now, sorry. I get the 9 and the 6.

Some people say the middle number is:

a. Always .1 as it is listing the number of discreet channels or

b. Say if you have Sub EQ HT, you could say it is .2 for two subwoofers based on them being a separately EQed output (and are therefore different).

c. The total number of subwoofers.

I assume you believe it is b (as anyone can separately EQ as many subs as they want) or c.

Is there a written agreed convention on this somewhere or does anyone know the answer?

P.S. I'm not being critical, I'm just wondering for when someone asks me on the forum what my setup is :)
The right answer is actually A, but everyone and anyone I know list their subs as channels, although mine is actually 4 plus a transducer, which is using up a channel on my minidsp, hence why I put 5.

in other words, mine is actually 9.1.6

or 9.4.6

or 9.5.6

🤣
 
Brilliant, thanks, clear as mud then 🤣
Guess I will follow (c) at least it gives the biggest number...
Hey, an idea, what about (d) if we do all the numbers as number of individual speaker drivers?
I use a 19.4.8 🤣
Or (e) add ports too, 23.8.10.
 
some big news for auro3D with yamaha adding auro3D to their new release product ...

 
Isn't that a bit of a surprise? I thought we had VHS and Betamax but Video 2000 was already dying :)
 
I curently have a 11.1 (7.1.4) layout.

I'm intersting in upgrading my receiver for Auro 3D and DTS X pro compatibility with a 13.2 layout.

I am aiming for a 7.2.6 layout with 4 height speakers (which i curently have) and additional hight center speaker and VOG.

Curently I have 4 Dali Alteco speakers as heights.

Should i buy two more Dali Alteco for center height and VOG? Is it possible to mount an Alteco speaker on ceilling , just above listening position, as VOG and expect good results?
 
Hi guys! Old thread digging here. I've just finished my home cinema living layout which consist in a dolby atmos setup 5.2.4 with 4 inceiling speakers.
I ve noticed that this configuration isn't alowing to have auro 3d upmixing. But, if I choose the amp assign layout with upper surround speakers(and not top-in ceiling) , I have the option to activate auro 3d.

In you experience, how will that work considering I can't change the current physical setup of the speakers? Has anyone played with auro3d in this configuration?

Thanks!
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom