Dolby Atmos


Show first post

52 replies

True, but it has also stated that it gets better with age, indicating that it whilst maybe it won't support this for launch, it maybe possible through firmware in the future. Also bearing in mind they're targetted the installer market, it would be a bit silly of them not to have thought about this. But yup, we'll see what happens
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
damo78 wrote:

True, but it has also stated that it gets better with age, indicating that it whilst maybe it won't support this for launch, it maybe possible through firmware in the future. Also bearing in mind they're targetted the installer market, it would be a bit silly of them not to have thought about this. But yup, we'll see what happens



That's a good point.
Also, this: https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/29/sonos-releases-new-speaker-amp-partners-with-sonance-for-in-wall-speakers/?guccounter=1

If they're partnering with Sonance, then this is definitely on the table in my view!
So now that APPLE TV has released Dolby Atmos as their Audio format.. I’m back to “Stereo” instead of a 5.1 system? I’ve already lost my blu-Rays to DTS format. I’m so frustrated with this system I wish I never bought it! :@
moorevtec wrote:

So now that APPLE TV has released Dolby Atmos as their Audio format.. I’m back to “Stereo” instead of a 5.1 system? I’ve already lost my blu-Rays to DTS format. I’m so frustrated with this system I wish I never bought it! :@



Atmos is purely optional. Set it to output DD 5.1 and you won't be "back to stereo". Go to Settings > Video and Audio > Audio Format and turn on Change Format, then select Dolby Digital 5.1.

Also, unless the Apple TV senses an Atmos capable setup, it isn't even offered as an option under "Atmospheric Audio". In other words, you are losing nothing.
Thanks for the reply. I think if the new movies are encoded in Atmos, than it will not switch to DD. I have my Apple TV set to DD 5.1 watching the new Jurassic World.. here is my setup

To be clear - I don’t care about Atmos. Or DTS. I just want a 5.1 DD theater for my movies. Simple as that.
Atmos is a layer on top of DD 5.1. The DD 5.1 core should be coming out of the Apple TV. I would contact Apple about this error.
Userlevel 5
Badge +17
Ryan said about the beam "With HDMI-ARC, a handshake with your TV will assure that Dolby Digital 5.1 is sent for the best sound when your source is in Dolby Digital Plus or Dolby Atmos."
So is this only true for the beam, or playbar & playbase as well, guess probably not as they use optical only?........
Userlevel 4
Badge +19
Playbase/Playbar will get DD5.1 over optical for HDMI sources only if the TV permits it. If the TV does not permit it (eg my Samsung and my LG) then additional steps may be necessary (eg EDID faker or secret TV menus, for my TVs).
I’m late to this conversation but... In my view Sonos has been exploring Atmos support for their updated (Sonos will not comment on this as they will not discuss future or up coming products) PlayBar which is long over due for a technology update and even hardware. Upcoming Smart TVs and selected current generation Smart TVs are supporting Atmos because now Netflix (selected content) and Apple TV have Dolby Atmos support. I believe that for there’re “premium” customers that again the Ability to turn on Dolby Atmos by adding two Play 1’s as an example and mounting them over head. Dolby Atmos is quite possible in Sonos Products but only if a New PlayBar Comes out with HDMI support. I would mount two over head Play 1’s or Play 3’s to get Atmos.
Userlevel 4
Badge +18
AvalonV6 wrote:

I’m late to this conversation but... In my view Sonos has been exploring Atmos support for their updated (Sonos will not comment on this as they will not discuss future or up coming products) PlayBar which is long over due for a technology update and even hardware. Upcoming Smart TVs and selected current generation Smart TVs are supporting Atmos because now Netflix (selected content) and Apple TV have Dolby Atmos support. I believe that for there’re “premium” customers that again the Ability to turn on Dolby Atmos by adding two Play 1’s as an example and mounting them over head. Dolby Atmos is quite possible in Sonos Products but only if a New PlayBar Comes out with HDMI support. I would mount two over head Play 1’s or Play 3’s to get Atmos.

There is very little evidence that Sonos is interested in Atmos. In fact the contrary is more likely.
Badge
bockersjv wrote:

There is very little evidence that Sonos is interested in Atmos. In fact the contrary is more likely.



They are very interested.

https://www.reddit.com/r/sonos/comments/ae9n40/some_interesting_items_in_sonos_survey_today/
Userlevel 6
Badge +16

All this tells you is that Sonos is interested in finding out if customers are interested.
Badge
pwt wrote:


All this tells you is that Sonos is interested in finding out if customers are interested.



That it literally the same thing... As a company they only survive if they have products that their users want.
If they wanted nothing to do with Atmos they would not even ask the question.

I don´t really need Atmos. But what i do want is more supported standards so i at least can get 5.1 from more sources.
It´s also a thin line, if they do decide to go down the Atmos road they can "piss off" alot of users who just bought pretty expensive Sonos speakers and now "have" to replace them. So they need to find out a way to make existing speakers work as much as possible. I for one have a Playbase, sub and two play 1´s, it will never work with atmos. But if they have a "cheap" HDMI Box that translates Atmos to the Playbase and these new Atmos "Satellites", then i might be interested since i would "only" have to buy new satellites and this Atmos box, but if i also have to get a new playbar/base. Not so much.
Userlevel 6
Badge +16
Danne08 wrote:

pwt wrote:


All this tells you is that Sonos is interested in finding out if customers are interested.


That it literally the same thing... As a company they only survive if they have products that their users want.
If they wanted nothing to do with Atmos they would not even ask the question.


Well, we're just arguing over semantics and the definition of 'interested' in this context, but it is literally not the same thing. Sonos might have absolutely no interest in implementing Atmos, but are performing customer research to validate this strategy. So, yes, they are 'interested' in the sense that they are testing customer demand, but might not be 'very interested' (as you initially stated) in implementing it.

Because A is interested in whether B is interested in C, does not mean that A is interested in C, per se.

Anyway, I have no 'interest' in this fight. I've opted not to use Sonos for home theatre. I just thought that your post might raise expectations in a way that is not actually justified by Sonos's actions.
Badge
pwt wrote:


Because A is interested in whether B is interested in C, does not mean that A is interested in C, per se.

Anyway, I have no 'interest' in this fight. I've opted not to use Sonos for home theatre. I just thought that your post might raise expectations in a way that is not actually justified by Sonos's actions.



Eh? Definately A->C
McMurdeR wrote:

pwt wrote:


Because A is interested in whether B is interested in C, does not mean that A is interested in C, per se.

Anyway, I have no 'interest' in this fight. I've opted not to use Sonos for home theatre. I just thought that your post might raise expectations in a way that is not actually justified by Sonos's actions.



Eh? Definately A->C


No, definitely market investigation.
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
The market research questionnaire does not mean that Sonos has any current plans regarding Atmos. Depending on the results of the study, it could even mean that Sonos has decided to not to include Atmos in future development plans.

The natural inclination when people see a study like this is that the other people will answer identical to how they would answer. But of course, that isn't true. If it were true, there really wouldn't be much point in asking the question in the first place.

Danne08 wrote:

It´s also a thin line, if they do decide to go down the Atmos road they can "piss off" alot of users who just bought pretty expensive Sonos speakers and now "have" to replace them. So they need to find out a way to make existing speakers work as much as possible.



No they do not. By this logic, companies would never be able to release "2.0" or better versions of an existing product, as there will always be customers who wish they had known the new product was going to be released. Sure, people get upset about this, but it's not logical to expect companies to give customers this sort of forewarning, nor are companies obligated to give customers features that were not provided at the time of purchase. That said, Sonos would be wise to announce the product at least a month or so before release, as they typically do. They also tend to give existing new features to existing products where it is possible, even though they are under no obligation to do so. I just don't see how customers could be rightly upset if things don't happen this way.
Badge
Smilja wrote:


No, definitely market investigation.



Ergo, they're interested.

Look, anyone can read between the lines. Nobody has claimed that anything is definate, but if Sonos is asking people about this stuff than it's clearly not far off their strategy - if it isn't there already. The grumbling is growing louder, and it's not just Blu Ray enthusiasts who are getting upset, the streamers are running into problems too. If Sonos can sort out their codec support, they erase one of the last reasons why their home theater products wouldn't go to the top of the recommendation list every time.
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
McMurdeR wrote:

Smilja wrote:


No, definitely market investigation.



Ergo, they're interested.

Look, anyone can read between the lines. Nobody has claimed that anything is definate, but if Sonos is asking people about this stuff than it's clearly not far off their strategy - if it isn't there already.



Asking does not mean anything more than Sonos wants to know what people think about the subject. Anything more than that is subjective guessing.

McMurdeR wrote:


The grumbling is growing louder, and it's not just Blu Ray enthusiasts who are getting upset, the streamers are running into problems too.



I don't know how you measure grumblings, or the different place you go to gauge general customer thoughts on the subject, but I haven't really noticed anything different around the boards. Even then, it's pretty clear that the sentiment on the boards don't really reflect the sentiments of the general population...which is why Sonos is asking the general population and not the boards to begin with.

McMurdeR wrote:


If Sonos can sort out their codec support, they erase one of the last reasons why their home theater products wouldn't go to the top of the recommendation list every time.



It would surely win over new customers, but hard to say whether it would be enough to make it worth it for Sonos. Again, why they are asking questions.
It is easy for all of us to mistake the slightly geeky place that is a forum (or very geeky in my case) for the general population. It's a little while since I was a Sonos reseller, but I doubt it's changed much..... most people who bought Playbars did so because they wanted:
1. TV sound that was markedly better than their TV's crappy speakers
2. A music speaker that sounded much better than their iPod dock, and allowed them to stream Spotify
3. Those two things in one package.

The vast majority of them wouldn't know a codec if it jumped up and bit them, and I don't say that in a disparaging way, it's just a fact.

Clearly there are other people who want more than that, but whether the Playbar's limited codec support is a 'problem' that has to be 'fixed' is a matter for debate.
Userlevel 6
Badge +16
McMurdeR wrote:

Smilja wrote:


No, definitely market investigation.



Ergo, they're interested.

Look, anyone can read between the lines. Nobody has claimed that anything is definate, but if Sonos is asking people about this stuff than it's clearly not far off their strategy - if it isn't there already.


Sonos might equally be data gathering to confirm a strategic decision not to implement Atmos.
Badge
John B wrote:

The vast majority of them wouldn't know a codec if it jumped up and bit them, and I don't say that in a disparaging way, it's just a fact.



We're talking well over a grand for a full 5.1 setup here. Not only do the vast majority not know about codecs, at this pricepoint they expect not to need to know, or care. And if Sonos doesn't care, well, it doesn't say much about Sonos.

I make my own peace with all this because I don't need DTS, DD+, Atmos etc - I transcode all my disks. I knew the features of the product before I bought it.
That said, I'd welcome them very much. I'm baffled by the ambivalence of the community when we see our peers get frustrated with the lack of codecs. Would you not like to see new features supported?
A "home cinema" product must support codecs, it's a given. I think Sonos know this. If there was a technical reason why they couldn't they'd just come out and say it. Otherwise it has to be in the pipe somewhere.
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
McMurdeR wrote:


We're talking well over a grand for a full 5.1 setup here. Not only do the vast majority not know about codecs, at this pricepoint they expect not to need to know, or care.



I agree with this to a point. People at this pricepoint often don't want to have to think about it. At the same time, there are people who do care about codecs and might be willing to shell out for it...hence again why Sonos is asking. To find out what the current market looks like.

McMurdeR wrote:


And if Sonos doesn't care, well, it doesn't say much about Sonos.



Who's saying they don't care? They have stated in the past that the majority of customers who buy Sonos stream and therefore are covered by the codecs they provide. They are asking questions to find out what the market wants now. That to me is evidence that they are interested in giving customers what they want. It just doesn't mean the market wants what you assume it does.

McMurdeR wrote:


I make my own peace with all this because I don't need DTS, DD+, Atmos etc - I transcode all my disks. I knew the features of the product before I bought it.
That said, I'd welcome them very much. I'm baffled by the ambivalence of the community when we see our peers get frustrated with the lack of codecs. Would you not like to see new features supported?



Yes I would. Does it mean I would trade out my playbar for a new one? Maybe, not sure. Will I switch to another vendor? Nope. Will making atmos speakers justify the cost and turn a profit? I have no idea. It's not ambivalence you're seeing, it's people trying to look at the matter objectively, from the perspective of the individual, overall consumers, and the company.

McMurdeR wrote:


A "home cinema" product must support codecs, it's a given. I think Sonos know this. If there was a technical reason why they couldn't they'd just come out and say it. Otherwise it has to be in the pipe somewhere.



Sonos does support a 5.1 codec, that is all they have to support, and that support alone has sold lots of products. There doesn't need to be a technical reason for not supporting more, nor do they need to give consumers any reasons why they only support DD 5.1 (and they did give a reason anyway). Your conclusion that Atmos must be in the pipeline isn't based on the facts, but on your own your own personal wish that it is.

Nothing wrong with wanting Sonos to do Atmos, just doesn't mean that they are developing it.

Probably also worth pointing out that what you're perceiving as ambivalence has developed from experience of seeing features requests for years that people are sure every body would want that would be an easy no brainer for Sonos to do with no down side...and being completing wrong in their bold predictions. You learn to just wait and see.

Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

Accept cookies Cookie settings