Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[whoareyou]

With JRSS off (no upmixing or downmixing) ....
Output configuration of 5.1 and 4 extra channels
10 channel audio file being played back
New channel system

I thought this configuration would configure output with a 5.1 container and 4 extra channels for a total of 10 channels.
Upon playback:
Total of 10 channels
Original input's last 4 channels of audio are missing

When JRSS is off (no downmixing), shouldn't the entire 10 channels be passed while leaving first 6 channels in 5.1 format + the 4 extra channels with the original audio?

[Matt]

What if you simply select 10 output channels?

I'm not sure we will map the channels above the 5.1 to the extra channels, but we should map them if you pick 10 channels.

[whoareyou]

Yes, when 10 channel is selected all channels are passed through, and this works fine with convolution. 

I was hoping to take advantage of the 5.1 mapping, where empty channels are inserted by JRiver for playback of 5.0 and 4.0,  but also allow for 10 channel source playback all in same zone.   

[Matt]

Mixing with the new approach ignores extra channels.

You should be able to use Parametric Equalizer to copy channels 7, 8, 9, etc. to the extra channels.

If there's nothing there, nothing will be copied.

Does that work?

[whoareyou]

There doesn't seem to be way to mix from the original channels 7-10 to extra channels as only the base 5.1 or 7.1 channels are available as source channels. 

Also, with 5.0 material a channel seems to be dropped with some extra channel configurations.
I tested a small sample of 5.0 material and played back with 5.1 output with and without extra channels.

5/5.1 4 extra channels and one of the channels is missing on output
5/10 channel ouput and one of the channels is missing on output

5/5.1 and 5/5.1 2 extra channels work as expected.

[Matt]

I'll try to make the extra channels take the input data in a coming build.  Thanks.

[whoareyou]

Thanks.  I appreciate it.

How about the 5.0 source that seems to be missing one of its channels when 4 extra channels are selected?  The channel is there with 2 extra channels, so shouldn't it remain when 4 channels are selected or when the output is just set to 10? 

[Matt]

Please test once a new build is out and we can talk more if there's still a problem.  I tried a 5.0 file and it seemed correct with the new code.  Thanks.

[whoareyou]

No problems.  thanks again.

[whoareyou]

With the latest build all channels are passed, but the 5.1 setting seems to have different semantics from 5.1 and no extra channels for 5.0 and 4.0.
With the 4 extra channels added, it's working same as if it's set to source number of channels.

Should 5.0 and 4.0 have the empty channels added, similar to the normal 5.1 playback for those channel formats? 

[whoareyou]

Re-reading previous post I thought it was a bit confusing.

When you configure 5.1 JRiver always presents a 5.1 container for output, and for this standard channel mapping JRiver adds empty blank channels to enforce the 5.1 channel mapping format.  So, 5.0 has empty SW channel added by JRiver and 4.0 has empty C and SW channel added.  Similar happens when 7.1 output container is selected, but with it's own mapping semantics.  End result is that in these mapping cases, the output mapping remains the same regardless of number of input channels.

However, when you add the extra channels, this behavior changes to be equivalent to the source number of channels setting.
For example 5.1 with 4 extra channels does not add the SW for 5.0 input material.

Should adding extra channels change what 5.1  (or 7.1 or any other) "base" setting mean to JRiver? 

At least for me, it seems that specifying 5.1 or 7.1 should work consistently.  Base configuration portion should add the empty channels as necessary (as if there are no extra channels) and the add extra channels should be added after this base. 

Just my thoughts.  Perhaps others feel different about this.

[Matt]

Previously when we mixed we would consider extra channels to simply be part of the regular channels.  So 2 channels with 4 extra became exactly like 5.1.

The change we made was to instead keep extra channels marked discretely.

This way they are not included in JRSS mixing.

We did change so that at least they still copy the input data because of this thread.

All of this is still optional (General > Advanced > New extra channel system) so you can try both ways.

Thanks.

[AGAWA]

I suggested some time ago to make HW config (DAC # of channels) independent from SW (# of channels in source) and allow for flexible mapping of any SW channel to any HW channel; make it discrete rather than fixed.

I have 4 speaker config and DAC capable of 10 channels, although 6 channels have their DA converters , others need to use externals.
Only yesterday I finally reached config that suits 5.1, 5.0, 4.0 , (3.0 in fact is 5.0 in SACD) and 2.0.
I  have  the following settings:
# of channels = 5.1
extra channels = none
no down or upmixing
in Parametric Eq:Add Center to Left - 3dB and Add Center to Right -3dB

It took me a long time investigating channels going around my system; having all discrete could allow to do it quickly.

Just a thought.

With thanks for splendid player and your great work

[whoareyou]

Previously when we mixed we would consider extra channels to simply be part of the regular channels.  So 2 channels with 4 extra became exactly like 5.1.

The change we made was to instead keep extra channels marked discretely.

This way they are not included in JRSS mixing.

We did change so that at least they still copy the input data because of this thread.

All of this is still optional (General > Advanced > New extra channel system) so you can try both ways.

Thanks.

Extra channels not be included with any mixing makes perfect sense to me. 

Other thing that always tripped me up is how the extra channels changed the semantics around various configuraitons i.e. your example of 2 + 4 = 5.1.   

Now, with new extra channels system, 5.1 with extra channels becomes "source number" of channels.  I thought (hoped), that with new system the semantics of each mapping would remain the same i.e. 5.1 with or without extra channels stayed 5.1

But, as it stands now, with new mapping system there is no difference between a 5.1 with 4 extras and simply selecting 10 channels. 

I did get a bit obsessed with the new mapping system, but perhaps now that all channels are passed, old system will do the trick. I'll let you know after I get a chance to test later on today. 


Thanks again.
 

[whoareyou]

So, I did just a bit more testing and it kind of surprised me.   Apparently adding 4 extra channels, for a total of 10, changes the mapping to "source mapping" in both the new and old systems and 5.0 or 4.0 never have the empty channels inserted. 
Looks like only option is to configure separate zones for playback.

[mattkhan]

So, I did just a bit more testing and it kind of surprised me.   Apparently adding 4 extra channels, for a total of 10, changes the mapping to "source mapping" in both the new and old systems and 5.0 or 4.0 never have the empty channels inserted. 

looks like this and https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,139490.msg967951.html#msg967951 are saying 2 completely different things to me, i.e. if Matt's post is correct then it must be a bug

[Matt]

If you think there's still a problem, please describe your input and output channel selection exactly.  You could email me a sample file (matt at jriver) as well.

Thanks.

[whoareyou]

Have to look around a bit to find some reasonably sized files.  I'll send you a 4.0 a 5.0 and a 10 channel.  JRiver configuration is pretty straight forward in that it's configured as 5.1 channels w/ 4 extras, or you can try them with 10 channel and 0 extra. 
For either new or old system, each file acts as if channels is set to source number regardless of channel configuration.
So, 4.0 play on first 4 channels, 5.0 play on first 5 channels.  No empty channels inserted.
10 channel play as expected.
Thanks

[whoareyou]

You have mail...
Thank you

[Matt]

With whoareyou's help I found that we were mixing differently when the input or output channel count was over eight channels.

We changed that in this build to no longer behave differently:
https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,139648.0.html

Thanks for the help everyone.

[whoareyou]

Just did some testing. 
10 channels, 0 extras, No Upmix/downmix.   Seems to work perfectly.
This appears to present a 7.1 channel.   I swap channels (my DAC is 5.1 configuration) and all channels play as expected.
From same zone I can now play, 4.0, 5.0,5.1 and my 10 channel decoded atmos.  Fantastic!!!

With 5.1 channel and 4 extra configuration, I think there is still small issue, and it's kind of difficult to see. 
Matt, I'll send you an e-mail regarding this.

At first I thought this configuration was ok, because when I play a 5.1 file it looks ok but I believe something is amiss.
I created a series of 10 channel test files.  Only one channel in each file has audio data. With 5.1/4 configuration,  channels 5 & 6 play silence and channels 6 & 7 each show 2 channels of audio being output by JRiver (instead of the 1).

These same files play correctly with the straight 10 channel configuration.

Word of caution..... I'm not the greatest Audacity user, but I think these files are adequate for testing

I also tried the 7.1 and 2 extra configuration.  I need to look at this some more, but on first glance it seemed that instead of being mapped to 7.1, the container is mapped to 5.1 channel layout.  Need to do some more testing on this one.

There also seemed to be issue with DSP dialog saving its configuration after changing the channel layout.  On several occassions when switching between 7.1/2 and 5.1/4, the channel mapping never seemed to switch and it was just completely wrong.  I may have switched the output format before playback had stopped for the current track, but not positive. 

At this point, the only thing that fixed the channel mapping was closing down JRiver and restarting. 

[Matt]

Thanks for the samples.

One issue is that the input has rear left and rear right.

Those are not part of the output since it's 5.1 with extra.

So it's normal for those channels to play as silent with the output.

I'm going to tweak the input to output matching a little for the next build.

Thanks again for all the help.

[whoareyou]

Thanks!  IMHO these changes represent big enhancements/fixes, and as Atmos decoding becomes more prevalent they will be very useful  to JRiver community. 

Really appreciate you looking into all of this.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I like what I'm seeing here guys!

I'm going to test this now. I could do much better testing if the Mac version had the latest channel mapping changes :~)

[The Computer Audiophile]

OK, I just tested this on my Windows PC with 4.0, 5.1, 7.1, 5.1.4, and 7.1.4 content. My DSP / channel config is just set to 12 (as seen in the screenshot).

I think there is still an issue, if I'm looking at this right. No matter if I select 12 channels or 7.1 + 4 extra channels, anything over 8 channels isn't mapped correctly unless it's the maximum number of channels configured.

4.0, 5.1, 7.1 and 7.1.4 work perfectly when configured for 12 channels.

5.1.4 places all 10 channels in positions / channels 1 - 10, when configured for 12 channels. The correct mapping is the same as 5.1, plus the four height channels go in positions 9,10,11,12 on a 12 channel system. Leaving channels 6 and 7 empty.

[The Computer Audiophile]

I know I've mentioned this previously, and I respect any decision you all make about features, but it would be fantastic if we had options for 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.4, and 9.1.6 along with 5.1, 7.1, etc...

This removes all ambiguity about how things are supposed to work and corresponds to nicely with the official channel language for music with over 8 channels. I'll attach a little graphic I made for a 7.1.4 system.

[Matt]

One possibility would be to map 10 channel as 5.1.4 and 12 channel as 7.1.4.  So just as there's no “8 channel” selection, only “7.1”, we could do the same with 10 and 12 channel.  We would need to figure out how to build the 4 height channels with JRSS.  Would that be a good change?

[The Computer Audiophile]

In my view that would be an amazing change. I don't know all the opposing points of view.

[whoareyou]

Interesting how the Atmos channel mapping looks.  I've only looked at it from perspective of decoding to wav via the Dolby Reference Player and the Music Media Helper tools whose output for 5.1.4 produces a straight 10 channel wav file.  With how JRiver works, this ends up working out perfectly with my 10 channel DAC allowing me to use one zone for 4.0, 5.0, 5.1 and 10 channel Atmos formats. 

So, not Atmos standard but it works great.

On other hand, if I was to use the offical Atmos format for 5.1.4, at minimum a 12 channel DAC seems to be minimum requirement. 

Obviously, I really like the idea of the "new" non-standard behavior that works with my decoded Atmos files, so I'm hoping this behavior can remain the same. 

Because of that, I like the idea of JRSS needing to be enabled as trigger to change mapping to the official Atmos behavior, as that seems to provide a path to using the non-standard approach that people like me use
.
Honestly, I think the official mapping would be a great addtion to JRiver, but for now ....

Please don't make me buy a new DAC (although it would give me a very good excuse)

[The Computer Audiophile]

5.1.4 is an Atmos standard and also discrete immersive dxd standard. I've purchased many 5.1.4 DXD albums.

[mattkhan]

Personally I think it would be simpler and massively more transparent if the mappings were explicitly shown in the output format screen and could be user controlled with the standards just expressed as a preset option. This would then cover all cases and be self documenting.

[The Computer Audiophile]

Personally I think it would be simpler and massively more transparent if the mappings were explicitly shown in the output format screen and could be user controlled with the standards just expressed as a preset option. This would then cover all cases and be self documenting.

I'm all for transparency and explicitly shown items, removing ambiguity and hopefully enabling me to not re-read the manual multiple times :~)

[whoareyou]

How would a graphical system handle 4.0 and 5.0 semantics from within the same zone?  I think that would be of importance to anyone with multichannel system. 

[mattkhan]

I don't understand the question, this is just a mechanism for mapping a set of input channels to a set of output channels (for each possible set of inputs). it's not complicated to provide a way to input this (and doesn't even need to be a gui, some simple text format would suffice)

[whoareyou]

A 4.0 file's channels are not the same order as a 5.1 channels.  So, does GUI map a channel identifier that is part of the audio file,  or are physical channel numbers mapped?   If it's just a number, channel 3 means something completely different depending on input.   
I don't know enough about these file formats, or what JRiver does, so I can't answer that question.

[mattkhan]

MC has all those mappings internally already but they are not clearly documented nor visible in the UI so it's just a question of exposing that to the user and letting them edit that mapping on a per source format basis instead of leaving it hardcoded internally. Such a change would automatically future proof MC against any possible format and any possible physical output format any end user wanted to use without requiring any dev work.

[whoareyou]

I know I've mentioned this previously, and I respect any decision you all make about features, but it would be fantastic if we had options for 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.4, and 9.1.6 along with 5.1, 7.1, etc...

This removes all ambiguity about how things are supposed to work and corresponds to nicely with the official channel language for music with over 8 channels. I'll attach a little graphic I made for a 7.1.4 system.

I'm trying to wrap my head around your diagrams.

Is the audio you are inputting to JRiver generated via the DRP/MMH?

I generated a 7.1.4 file and this is what dbPoweramp reports as channel order:
Left,  Right,  Center,  Sub-woofer,  Back Left,  Back Right,  Side Left,  Side Right,  Top Front Left,  Top Front Right,  Top Back Left,  Top Back Right
And For 5.14:
Left,  Right,  Center,  Sub-woofer,  Back Left,  Back Right,  Top Front Left,  Top Front Right,  Top Back Left,  Top Back Right

So, channels extra channels are there, but I'm confused.  Back Left and Back Right seeme to be reversed from your diagrams, but I suspect this is difference in terminology or maybe dbPowerAmp is just wrong?  Does anyone know how the channel information is obtained, or possibly a better tool to analyze?

Also, Matt said he was going to make another change for next build which might explain part of what you think is wrong
https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,139490.msg968270.html#msg968270

[The Computer Audiophile]

I'm trying to wrap my head around your diagrams.

Is the audio you are inputting to JRiver generated via the DRP/MMH?

I generated a 7.1.4 file and this is what dbPoweramp reports as channel order:
Left,  Right,  Center,  Sub-woofer,  Back Left,  Back Right,  Side Left,  Side Right,  Top Front Left,  Top Front Right,  Top Back Left,  Top Back Right
And For 5.14:
Left,  Right,  Center,  Sub-woofer,  Back Left,  Back Right,  Top Front Left,  Top Front Right,  Top Back Left,  Top Back Right

So, channels extra channels are there, but I'm confused.  Back Left and Back Right seeme to be reversed from your diagrams, but I suspect this is difference in terminology or maybe dbPowerAmp is just wrong?  Does anyone know how the channel information is obtained, or possibly a better tool to analyze?

Also, Matt said he was going to make another change for next build which might explain part of what you think is wrong
https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,139490.msg968270.html#msg968270

This is the official Atmos channel mapping for a 7.1.4 system.

[whoareyou]

Thanks. 

5.1.4 is an Atmos standard and also discrete immersive dxd standard. I've purchased many 5.1.4 DXD albums.

Also, I missed your comment regarding the 5.1.4 DXD albums.  Didn't realize these are available and has me thinking a little differently about this.  I can play those 10 channel converted WAV, but it's a niche use case for Atmos. 

[Matt]

We'll try this for the next build:
Changed: 10 channel is now 5.1.4 and 12 channel is 7.1.4.  JRSS does not currently fill the height channels.

Thanks for all the help here!

[The Computer Audiophile]

Thanks. 

Also, I missed your comment regarding the 5.1.4 DXD albums.  Didn't realize these are available and has me thinking a little differently about this.  I can play those 10 channel converted WAV, but it's a niche use case for Atmos.

I don't believe it's niche for Atmos. Check out all the official speaker configurations here - https://www.dolby.com/about/support/guide/speaker-setup-guides/

[The Computer Audiophile]

We'll try this for the next build:
Changed: 10 channel is now 5.1.4 and 12 channel is 7.1.4.  JRSS does not currently fill the height channels.

Thanks for all the help here!

Thanks Matt!!!

[whoareyou]

I don't believe it's niche for Atmos. Check out all the official speaker configurations here - https://www.dolby.com/about/support/guide/speaker-setup-guides/

Thanks.  Actually right after I posted, I realized that for my configuration that niche comment was probably in error, and I was going to check out a bit more.  Thanks for the additional info. 
Will be great if Matt's additional changes get the mapping all straightened out for your setup.

[whoareyou]

The .27 release with new 5.1.4 output setting / channel mixing works properly with my decoded Atmos WAVs.  The new channel mapping significantly upgraded JRiver's playback engine.   

Thanks again!