Dolby Atmos: In-Ceiling vs Height Speaker! Which is better for your setup? Let's test it out!

Pioneer AVRs:

Denon AVRs:

Marantz AVRs:

Marantz Preamp/Processors:

**My DJ Gear**

My favorite subwoofers:

DISCLAIMER: This video and description contain affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases.

Equipment used to film & edit:

Thank you for watching!
Don't forget to like and subscribe!

[danielgarvey]

Thanks so much for this video! Just last week I purchased a Denon 6700h, with intentions of Atmos. I have 7.1 bed layer of def techs and wanted the Atmos experience. Everyone said ceiling or upward firing. I had 4 extra pro monitor 1000's, so I decided to follow the Auro 3d set up. Two above my mains, and two above my back surrounds. All I can say is wow! My front stage sounds like I have towers.I have Demand d11's as my mains and 4 d9's as surrounds, the 1000's compliment them perfectly. When best buy installer came, he said that this was wrong, but he did it as I requested. After we calibrated, he was amazed, he said that he had no idea, but was impressed. He had no idea about Auro 3d. Thank you again for helping me make this right decision.

[TheReverendSlim]

I'm going to try to calmly go through this by the numbers. If anyone ever reads this, I'll be surprised... but let's do this.
1. In-ceiling or ON-ceiling (or even on-wall) is irrelevant. The only issue with in-ceilings is with the ones that point straight down. At the Dolby spec'd 45 and 135 angles, most in-ceilings that aim straight down will have such poor off-axis response that it isn't ideal. BUT many in-ceilings now have either angled baffles so they point toward the MLP (making them functionally the same as a speaker mounted ON the ceiling) or at least aimable tweeters so you get the directional part of the sound aimed toward the seats. Those most directional frequencies are what matters most for cross-channel imaging.
2, The physical speaker boundary in the home is NOT supposed to line up with the orthogonal mixing interface, but with where speakers would be in a much taller space like a movie theater. What matters is THE ANGLES. We hear in terms of azimuth above us, so what is important is our ability to hear amplitude-based steering in certain regions of the room. The interface is an abstraction layer to make it easier to visualize general placement in a room. Now, in theatrical processors, the data gets adapted to the space by way of the initial setup making you input the room dimensions and the locations of every individual speaker in that room. If the home version relied on that, it would have been a bit outside of what your "average user" would understand (though us enthusiasts would love it - and Trinnovs implement some of this).
3. Research shows that we have a pretty good ability to hear between speakers on the vertical up until just over 45 degrees. Where imaging between two speakers falls off is as you hit about 60 degrees of separation (whereas 60 degrees of separation in front of us for stereo is great), at which point people surveyed were unable to accurately place sounds steered to the upper speaker consistently. The reason this is important is this: Yes, when you place speakers at your room boundaries closer to the 30 degrees of the front/rear height designation, you are making that interface match your speaker boundary in your smaller room. You're ALSO leaving a 120 degree angular gap. Contrary to what you say in the video, this actually makes it WAY harder for sounds to image above the listener. In a top front/rear configuration, you would only have about 90 degrees of separation above the listener... which inherently works better for placement above the listener. Static placements won't be precise, but they don't need to be... because research also shows that our perception of spatial resolution above us isn't that great. However, our ability to perceive pans across these speaker locations tends to work pretty well regardless.
4. The areas of the room that you show with a red X do not get "no coverage". Because we hear in terms of azimuth, those regions of the room get imaging between the two layers for sounds NOT at max Z in the interface. So for example, if an object in front of you directly between two adjacent speakers on the vertical was at say 0.75 on the Z axis, this means roughly that 75% of that sound will be in the corresponding height... but that 25% would be in the ear-level channel. So with two speakers with 45 degrees of angular separation, you would hear that sound at about 33 degrees... or basically where your front room boundary is (or where that green circle is at 5:50ish in the video). In the case of your Atmos file, as your voice moves upward, it cleanly pans from my left main to my top front left speaker. Now, does the sound appear to be closer to me once it stops at max Z? Yes, because...
5. Precedence. The fundamental truth is that a speaker closer to the listener will inherently sound closer to the listener. This is why in a perfect world, we would have a layout where the distance from us to every speaker is exactly identical. But none of us live in that perfect world, which is why our AVRs have distance/delay settings. This makes it so that sounds from speakers at varying distances will all arrive at the MLP at the same time. So as sounds move from speaker to speaker, these delays ensure that those pans move to the right degree for the intended placement. They also help lock imaging between speakers. BUT although this works great as sounds move between speakers, when a sound is firmly planted in a speaker that is physically closer to the listener, your brain still goes "That's coming from that speaker there." whereas sounds imaged between multiple speakers tend to kinda' image THROUGH their physical plane more generally.
6. The quality of your AVR/Pre-pro will not affect where you perceive a sound to be with top front/rear nor will the quality of its room correction. That speaker's imaging BETWEEN speakers will be affected by equalization (because you actually need those high directional frequencies to image well between speakers), but a sound from an individual speaker will sound like it is coming from the direction of that speaker. Now what CAN affect this is something like Trinnov's re-mapping, which can alter how all of this stuff gets steered... but that is a whole other conversation.
7. At 7 minutes, you ask how in-ceiling speakers will image a sound right above your head. Actually, they will image a sound there FAR BETTER than front/rear heights will. Why? Because they're phantom imaging between 4 speakers with 90 degrees of angular separation. Speakers at 45 degrees of elevation, too, which will already inherently sound more "above" the listener than those at 30. If they're pointed down, you still get the imaging there... IF you've equalized to account for their off-axis response. With angled in-ceilings, it would be no different than if you had speakers mounted on the ceiling (like my Prime Elevations), because the directional frequencies are aimed toward the seats. It can't "image it a little bit lower" or higher because at that point, it is just imaging IN TERMS OF AZIMUTH. You are hearing that direction, not a coherent point source. What COULD image it a little bit lower is if the object was brought down from max Z and the side surrounds started to get some bleed of the sound... but that kind of in-room placement doesn't resolve as well.
8. At 7:34, you say that if you have front/rear height, they will "for sure be able to image that sound without issue." This is exactly the opposite of how imaging works between speakers. You will never get better phantom imaging between two speakers with equal amplitude at 120 degrees of separation than you would at 90 (and the lower the angular separation gets, the more coherent the imaging between them, up to a point). This problem is exactly why Auro in the theater uses a VOG speaker - because that's where the inherent weakness is in imaging in their layout (though VOG in the home doesn't work quite as well, because... see Precedence). You are effectively trading imaging overhead for more compressed imaging from ear to height. Front/rear height objectively, absolutely makes it MORE difficult to image sounds precisely above the listener. How much does that matter? It depends... because remember, that region of hearing around us is where we lack spatial resolution anyway.
9. You're not missing anything with a top front/rear placement. Because of the separation angles and how our hearing works with elevation (which I had a long fun discussion with Joe about recently that I won't rehash here because it was nerd-level talk about AES papers), you're actually gaining precision - not just in the region directly above the listener, but in the areas about half-way between your ear-level and height speakers. To summarize what we discussed, front/rear height gets you about 15 degrees of precision for elevation above ear level, whereas top front/rear (whether in or on-ceiling) gets you about 23, with the regions below that being spatially imprecise with steering anyway. That part is, in my opinion, MORE important for good Atmos than just the "directly above the listener" content. And I say that having done every possible layout one can do for 7.1.4, upfirers included.
10. So what does all this mean? It means that the disconnect you speak of isn't that the orthogonal interface doesn't match up with the boundaries of a smaller home space, because it isn't supposed to. The disconnect is that the Atmos mixing interface is, at a foundational level, just a perceptual room-based interface for what is ultimately still vector-based amplitude panning with an additional aspect that attempts in-room placement. And once you wrap your head around it, you'll understand that what is most important is maintaining angular separation between speakers in each region of the room such that amplitude panning is still stable between each adjacent speaker. It's why Dolby's mix room guidelines are for 7.1.4 with top front/rear placement. That is literally the minimum layout being used for all home mixes. Everything above that is to add precision in larger spaces or coverage for more listeners.

Thank you for attending my TED talk. If you made it this far, comment "Channa's shirt is dope." 😃

[petery]

7.1.4 here and it’s all making sense with every video you put out, height speakers in my system. Keep
Up the great work in making more enthusiasts aware .. cheers

[BoukeNL]

Wow, it's so incredibly true!!
Immediately I changed the 4 top speakers from ceiling to actual height speakers and the object placement is so much clearer.
The Auro3D tractor demo now is amazing, really amazing (i do have a VOG which is almost mandatory now that the front heights are further away from the listening position)
Thanks for the insight Mister de Silva.

[thelawfamilyproduction]

OMG, you are finally proving that I am not crazy!

In the beginning, I did a 7.1.4 set up for my Auro 3D with the 4 height speakers. The home theater sounded really 3D like with airplane sound coming from the front top, all the way to the back of the room.

Then I upgraded the system, made it to basically a overhead placement, and it sounded restricted. Just sudden height sounds but disappears.

I have been telling people to set it up with height speakers, and they all think I am crazy.

[pgreen]

Great video. I think a lot of people don’t understand that they only reason the Dolby speaker layout is the way it is was they didn’t want to get sued by Auro3D and they didn’t want to pay Auro a licensing fee. It was a comprise. Hindsight being what it is I think Auro should have just let them use it because it might have Studios more willing to do Auro3D mixes as well.

[JonnyVee]

Running a 5.2.6 setup with an Anthem 1140.

- Top middle is designated “middle in-ceiling” and an actual in ceiling speaker
- Top Front is designated “Front on wall” and is a ceiling mounted speaker angled towards the row of seats (but not toed-in to MLP). These speakers are located 45 degrees - halfway between seating and front wall.
- Top back are designated “Back on wall”. These speakers are angle mounted towards seating and are at the ceiling/wall junction
- Theatre Area is small - 12’ from front to back and 7.5’ ceiling
- Seating is 2’ from wall.

I loved your test video(s) and are great system tests. Results:

1. When you played the middle content, only my middle were is use. So if both backs/fronts are supposed to be in use in a .4 system, and middle only in a .6 … its working.
2. Panning around the room, bed layer, and height layer was as per expected.
3. Room size perception and separation of bed/height layers. Even though my front heights are halfway, they don’t make the height layer seem small. They actually do the opposite and open up the top. At their location they provide very good separation between bed/height due to my lower ceiling height. If they were further to the front that separation would be eroded. So while not ideal for going straight up from bed to height (your left speaker example) as mine does move in. The setup is much better for overhead effects and panning - helicopters, rain …etc., which is a higher priority for me.

Hope that helps

[buddyluv]

Your Atmos mix is fantastic. I played it for my brother, and it blew his socks off. He took it to his setup to check if everything was working.

[mohannair]

Ok just tested this on my system. I'm running 5.2.4 with 4 in ceilings as per Dolby. Yes when the sound goes from front left to top front left it does go right up but slightly towards you - however it is still distinctly above and far forward. At the end of that transition from FL to FTL, the sound came entirely out of the top front left speaker. So it doesn't feel odd or that the sound is coming from somewhere it isn't supposed to.

After running the whole video, my conclusion was that the point you are making is a valid one, BUT it doesn't really matter in terms of practical reality as the sound does come mostly from where you expect it to.

I really enjoyed this demo and overall made me happy that my system works as intended - thank you for making one of the best Atmos demo files too btw.

[theNABILcompany]

Thanks for this project. After watching a bunch of your videos, and a bunch from your peers, I got the confidence to overcome the limitation my concrete ceiling produced and went for 2 heights on wall up front, above my FL and FR, about 3 inches below the ceiling and 2 in the rear, at the same height, about 4 feet behind my SL and SR. I played around with a lot of official Atmos demo content and found it cool but nothing placed the sound exactly as intended like your video did. Until your full video, I was concerned about not being able to image sound above my head but when you move it across the top and to the middle, I swear it sounded exactly like a speaker had moved across my ceiling right to the top of my head. I have a 5.2.4 setup now. An Anthem MRX 1120 running PSB Image T6 x2, XC, XB x2 with a level matched Paradigm Cinema Sub and SVS PB1000 with 4 SVS Prime Elevations up top. I'm wondering if I would have even more benefit from throwing 2 more up top, 45 degrees ahead of me (contractor buddy pitched a tray ceiling attached to my concrete ceiling idea and I'm considering it). Considering how I could trace your sound almost perfectly with my eyes closed as it moves around and above me, in my space, 16x16', I wonder if it'll add anything worthwhile or not but then again, it shouldn't diminish what I already have, right? Thanks for your great content, friend.

[fatboycarney]

Ok well I am not the target you are looking for comments from (5.1.2 Upfiring, Denon), but since I appreciate your hard work and this was a great test of my currently limited setup which I am actually investigating upgrading and seriously looking at front height vs ceiling speakers. With 2 Dolby upfiring any height info you sent front or back or middle it was all sent to the upfiring speaker. This really highlighted how bad upfiring speakers are as its so easy to locate the sound origin. What actually did an ok, slightly better job was when you were in height overhead, the matrix effect between the 2 dolby upfiring speakers took away most of the ability to locate the sound coming from the speaker and made it seem like it was somewhere overhead.

[jimdshea]

A year+ later - still helping people. Thanks so much - subbed🎉

[kevinmastah]

Hi ChannAtmos aka Techno Dolby ;-)
Running a Denon x4700h.
5.1.4 for now. Planning to go 7.1.4.
Front height & Rear height.
Your interactive Atmos mix plays and sound like intended.
Well I use DynamicEQ and had to change some sound lvls. Because of the boosted surrounds & rears. Had to lower those a bit.
When you had the ball in the middle height, the sound came just from above like it should.
And when you go front left to front left height it did go up and down.
Again you did it my friend.
Great content. I know its time consuming and you put in a lot of effort.
Can’t wait for your next release!!
I ❤your stuff
Dolby should hire you! 😂
A BIG Thank you!!

[nual]

It worked just like your demonstrationI . I sent it from my iMac to my Apple TV in next room and got great result.

[BugleBoogie]

Channa, My system is 7.2.4 consisting of the following: Denon X-6700H, Oppo UDP-205, Klipsch speakers exclusively, consisting of the following: A pair of RP-8060FAs For fronts (not using the built-in ATMOS speakers), RP-450C center channel, A pair of RP-150Ms for side surround, 1 SPL-15 Sub, 1 R-115SW, Sub, A pair of R-5800-W IIs for rear surround, and 4 CDT-5800-C II in-ceiling speakers. I calibrated the Denon with the Denon app. My wife and I ran the interactive video more than once and both of us agree that the sound appears where it is supposed to. The ceiling speakers point down and the tweeters are aimed at the center of the room. Our seating portion if very close to the center of the room. My room acoustics are far from perfect. It is a 3 sided room without any acoustical treatment.

[healthynutster]

I’ve been into home theater since the 80’s and have dutifully upgraded each time there was a new format. I’ve tried to follow the Dolby specs as close as possible and have never really been very impressed with most movies (with a few exceptions, e.g., The Harry Potter series). Until you and your associates created some much needed clarity on speaker positioning and your interviews with Wilfred, I believed the reason there was so little envelopment with surround were poor mixes. While that’s still definitely an issue, you guys have convinced me that the Auro recommended speaker positions are sonically optimal for the way we actually hear and my upcoming dedicated room will be configured that way. Many thanks and keep up the great work!

[Snapps]

With 4 in ceiling speakers it sounded perfect. Tried with temp height channels. Didn't notice much difference between

[ViciousXUSMC]

I have been arguing this point for about 2 years now, and always fail to get thru to anybody. Not only does it work for Atmos, but makes the setup more universal for DTS:X and Auro 3D. Now at some point a year or two ago I did see documentation that the heights are now approved for Atmos, but I am having trouble finding that documentation and only finding the old setup guides.

I think the KEY here is not just slapping height speakers up, but ensure they are angled properly. I used a laser level for this and I clearly here separation for height speakers.

The analogy I used to use was a helicopter. If a helicopter is in the distance, going straight up and then flying overhead that sound source needs to be able to go straight up in the air not be moving towards you as it rises like it would do with in ceiling speakers, the same way an object pans left to right is by fading it from left to right, that is exactly how an object moves from to back.

So that object should not move forward towards you just by going "up" and the only way to do that sonically and correctly is having your height speakers in line with your front mains.
then as it starts moving towards you it would start to fade to the rear heights. Full control of positioning both vertical and horizontal.

If you pan left to right in line, it just makes sense to pan down to up in line as well.

Problem is, while this is the RIGHT way to do it, its all about the Atmos mix, most mixes are just random sounds and effects and not true 3D audio. They may very well only mix in a sound effect that is an "overhead" effect, that works well with in-ceiling speakers rather than take advantage of what could be a really immersive 3D audio experience.

The Atmos in ceiling setup is fundamentally broken and flawed, but nobody understands or agrees.

But I am an Audio guy and I.T. Engineer I think differently, as I don't just listen to what is said, I think and learn.

I have a Ambisonic 3D microphone setup and have done my own testing so that users without an Atmos setup can look around in VR to hear my setup and see how it works.

[taz]

Filed played back perfectly on a 2019 Shield via Kodi, connected to my RZ-50.

Your demo played back as you intended, with a 5.1.4 system (front and overhead heights, all on-ceiling). As expected, when you went to the top rear, it played out the overhead heights, which makes sense (though left/right were correct). Good demo. And thanks again for the last one, because I did not have the RZ-50 configured properly, but your video fixed it.

Keep it up Channa!

[jacobeyre]

I have martin logan afx speakers for hight and sometimes its so hard to tell if they are doing what they are supposed to because there is so much going on in the movie. The airplane at the 13 minute mark of your video sounded like it was actually flying above my head. Now i know for sure they work as intended. Thank you for doing what you're doing 🤙 Side note, I uploaded you video to a thumb drive and plugged it into the front of my xbox one just in case anyone was curious how to watch on their HT with the dolby atmos. Im sure there are other ways but this was the easiest for me.