New to ATMOS

kfalls

Super Member
I haven't made the plunge to ATMOS yet, but interested. I have a few questions.

Is it worth the effort?

I've seen ATMOS enabled 5.1/7.1 receivers, but they don't appear to have amps or pre-outs for the ATMOS speakers. How does this work?

Which provides the best ATMOS effect, upward-firing or ceiling speakers?

Which sounds better 2 or 4 ATMOS speakers. (room size 12x25x8).
 
Is it worth the effort?
An ATMOS setup does enhance the sound. I feel that it was worth it to set up an ATMOS system.

I've seen ATMOS enabled 5.1/7.1 receivers, but they don't appear to have amps or pre-outs for the ATMOS speakers. How does this work?
If the receiver is 7.1 it could be set up for 5.1 channels at ear level with one pair of ceiling speakers. I do not know how a 5.1 receiver could be used for ATMOS.

Which provides the best ATMOS effect, upward-firing or ceiling speakers?
I have never heard an ATMOS system using upward firing speakers so I cannot compare. The ceiling mounted speakers work well.

Which sounds better 2 or 4 ATMOS speakers. (room size 12x25x8).
The more speakers you have, the better the ATMOS decoder will be able to place the "object-based audio" in the optimum location.
 
Last edited:
Avengers Infinity War included an Atmos demo clip, before the movie. It reminded me of the THX demo, that used to be included on Laser and DVD. The demo clip was very convincing, with good use of overheard, and fly-by effects.

All of the Atmos speakers, in the theater, were mounted near, but not in the ceiling. So, I'd think even mini-monitors mounted high on the wall would be effective.

And tcdriver is correct, you'd need a 7 channel AVR in order to power a basic 5.1.2 Atmos set up. A 9 channel receiver would support 5.1.4 systems. If you feel ambitious, you could run a 7.1.4 system with the newer 11 channel AVR's. Now that would be sweet! You have the room for it! :D
 
From the Dolby website:

Dolby Atmos speaker setups: What the 5.1.2 description means
[5] This refers to the number of traditional surround speakers (front, center, and surround).

[.1] The middle number refers to how many powered subwoofers you can connect to your receiver.

[.2] The final number refers to how many in-ceiling or upward-firing speakers are in your Dolby Atmos® setup.
 
Thanks, everyone. It makes sense you could do 5.2.1 on a 7.1 receiver, 7.2.1 on a 9.1 receiver and 5.4.1 on a 9.1 receiver. I never thought about it that way. Assignable channels, what a concept. I think I was already going toward ceiling mounted or in-ceiling speakers for ATMOS. I have enough speakers lying around that would suit the purpose. I was thinking some B&W LM-1s since they're good quality and already have an integrated adjustable mount. I had always enjoyed the THX demos at the beginning of a movie. Reminds me of the test the OmniMax theaters did before their features. I have an Emotiva 7.1 system, but not ready to bite the bullet on the XMC-1 processor. It's a little too rich for my blood right now. Which is why I was looking at the ATMOS receivers. Too bad most affordable ATMOS receivers don't have pre-outs. It may make more sense to add another $1000 or so and get a serious processor. Unless someone knows of an affordably-priced receiver with pre-outs???
 
Thanks, StimpyWan. I had looked a few years ago, a short time after ATMOS for home came out on the Yamaha site. It seemed then they were going away from pre-outs. It's good to see they're back in vogue again. Probably more out of necessity because of ATMOS. I'm looking at the 9.2 offerings. I've always been a Yamaha, Denon fanboy, but the Integra and Marantz look interesting. I liked the Yamahas for their power and processing and Denon because it always sounded more musical. I just haven't had any exposure to Integra and Marantz, but read a lot of good reviews. How do they stand up with the Yamaha and Denon choices? Does anyone have a particular favorite 9.2 receiver?
 
Early adopter here. IMHO, Dolby Atmos is the most significant advancement in home theater EVER. MI-5, IT, and the original Jumanji in Atmos are simply epic. Some mixes are better than others. Also, Roger Waters The Wall and the latest Kraftwerk Blurays are in Atmos as well and are just mind blowing.

If you don't have to also have dts:X, you can find great deals on the Integra DHC-80.6 AVP - that's what I use.

Oh, I'm 5.1.4 with four ceiling speakers.
 
Early adopter here. IMHO, Dolby Atmos is the most significant advancement in home theater EVER. MI-5, IT, and the original Jumanji in Atmos are simply epic. Some mixes are better than others. Also, Roger Waters The Wall and the latest Kraftwerk Blurays are in Atmos as well and are just mind blowing.

If you don't have to also have dts:X, you can find great deals on the Integra DHC-80.6 AVP - that's what I use.

Oh, I'm 5.1.4 with four ceiling speakers.

DTS:X always sounded intriguing to me. I'm afraid if I didn't have it I would want it. It also amazes me how compact the receivers are with the number of amplifiers. Are they all going Class D? I've also read a little about Class H. Any manufacturers using it in receivers?
 
Thanks, StimpyWan. I had looked a few years ago, a short time after ATMOS for home came out on the Yamaha site. It seemed then they were going away from pre-outs. It's good to see they're back in vogue again. Probably more out of necessity because of ATMOS. I'm looking at the 9.2 offerings. I've always been a Yamaha, Denon fanboy, but the Integra and Marantz look interesting. I liked the Yamahas for their power and processing and Denon because it always sounded more musical. I just haven't had any exposure to Integra and Marantz, but read a lot of good reviews. How do they stand up with the Yamaha and Denon choices? Does anyone have a particular favorite 9.2 receiver?

I've owned Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, and Yamaha. But, I like Yamaha best. Though, the Pioneer was very nice too. Yamaha just sounds more open and detailed to me. I like my Yamaha AVR's even more than my NAD separates.

As to sound quality, Denon and Marantz are owned by the same parent company and are built in the same factory. Both are reported to be warmer sounding. Onkyo and Integra are the same brands. Integra is Onkyo's version of an Aventage or Elite line. Very nice sounding, more high end. Oh yea, Onkyo owns Pioneer now. So, brand differences are getting smaller.

But, I'm still a Yamaha fanboy too. I stick with them, whenever possible. My current Yamaha lacks Atmos, though it has features that current units don't have. So, if anything, I might add presence speakers. Though, Atmos does sound nice, and I like the thought of Atmos encoded music!
 
I've owned Denon, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, and Yamaha. But, I like Yamaha best. Though, the Pioneer was very nice too. Yamaha just sounds more open and detailed to me. I like my Yamaha AVR's even more than my NAD separates.

As to sound quality, Denon and Marantz are owned by the same parent company and are built in the same factory. Both are reported to be warmer sounding. Onkyo and Integra are the same brands. Integra is Onkyo's version of an Aventage or Elite line. Very nice sounding, more high end. Oh yea, Onkyo owns Pioneer now. So, brand differences are getting smaller.

But, I'm still a Yamaha fanboy too. I stick with them, whenever possible. My current Yamaha lacks Atmos, though it has features that current units don't have. So, if anything, I might add presence speakers. Though, Atmos does sound nice, and I like the thought of Atmos encoded music!

My first Yamaha was an R9 stereo receiver, before surround sound. I was intrigued by Quadraphonic, so when the DSR-100 Pro came out I used it with my R9 and bought an MX-35 and put together my first surround system with Klipsch Kg4s and Kg2 center. Laserdisc was popular so I purchased a CDV-1000. I still have a few CDV discs lying around. I don't think they play on anything I have now, at least not the video portion. I later purchased the RX-V2092 then traded up to the RX-V2095 which I still own. I came across an M-65 to power, my front speakers. The M-65 is an amp, Tim the Tool Man would appreciate. Ugh, Ugh, Ugh...
 
My first Yamaha was an R9 stereo receiver, before surround sound. I was intrigued by Quadraphonic, so when the DSR-100 Pro came out I used it with my R9 and bought an MX-35 and put together my first surround system with Klipsch Kg4s and Kg2 center. Laserdisc was popular so I purchased a CDV-1000. I still have a few CDV discs lying around. I don't think they play on anything I have now, at least not the video portion. I later purchased the RX-V2092 then traded up to the RX-V2095 which I still own. I came across an M-65 to power, my front speakers. The M-65 is an amp, Tim the Tool Man would appreciate. Ugh, Ugh, Ugh...

I owned both CED capacitance discs and Laser discs. A glutton for punishment, I suppose? I still own several Laser disc players, and have plans to set one up again (soon)!

I have several Yamaha pieces around, that all function and play fine. First, was a RX-V990, and it's companion DDP-1 AC-3 decoder. Next up, a DSP-A3090, then a RX-V3000, and currently a RX-A3030. I should move to separates again, with a processor. But, with codecs changing and being added so often, that wouldn't help much either.
 
If you mount your rear 4 speakers correctly for 7.1 you don't need Atmos. But that said Atmos has a totally different mix that 7.1 so most of what your hearing is the different mix of the two systems. Remember your ears are on either side of your head not stacked on top of your head and under your chin, so being able to hear sound change vertically is a function of the non linearity frequency response of the ear of axis.
 
If you mount your rear 4 speakers correctly for 7.1 you don't need Atmos. ...
Nobody needs Dolby Atmos, however; if one wants to hear the sound field as mixed for Dolby Atmos, one will need properly placed height speakers and an Atmos decoder/amplifier setup. I find the added information provided by Dolby Atmos (or dts:X) worthwhile. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom