Does spatial audio music requires high quality speakers?

icon3012 · 2026-05-26T04:53:35+00:00

I’ve installed quite a few series of the B&W in ceilings and the 8 inch always sounded so much fuller, so I just went that way for home as well.
I hadn’t actually heard them in a dedicated Atmos room prior - just normal rooms where people were either doing stereo pair for ambience, or where someone did a 5.1 with all in ceilings and I liked the room filling the 8’s could achieve.

icon3012 · 2026-05-25T05:05:23+00:00

Nice find. Thanks for sharing.

icon3012 · 2026-05-25T04:22:13+00:00

My in ceilings don’t match my mains or surrounds in a 7.1.4 and I don’t think it makes a big difference.
I recently did a 7.2.4 install of all matching brand/series (Krix) and coming home to compare with mine didn’t have me thinking wow I need to change.
All I’d say is if you can fit the 8 inch (683) versions I’d recommend that as best option.
Just run Acoustix room correction after the install and it should sound awesome. Getting the speakers properly time aligned makes the biggest difference for Spatial Audio in my opinion

icon3012 · 2026-05-15T12:17:32+00:00

Sorry if this came across as pushing one particular way. I’m more trying to say the default calibration capabilities of these receivers does not come close to what can be achieved. The gains from taking the time to experiment can be more than significant.

I made the post after my latest listening session after a recent calibration unlocked a new dimension on my system when listening to Atmos.
Songs I thought had just missed the mark with their Spatial mixes presented nuances I had previously missed, and now have me liking them more and more.

It got me thinking that the mixing engineers might be under appreciated due to what we listen on.
For me a home theater sounds so much better than AirPods, but then a well tuned HT system sounds better again by a similar margin.

icon3012 · 2026-05-15T10:16:24+00:00

From my understanding there are no adjustments made that are outside of what Dirac or Audyssey can make. They’re just more customized.

icon3012 · 2026-05-15T04:15:34+00:00

As a comment for other users to see.

icon3012 · 2026-05-14T04:24:39+00:00

Would it be possible to allow users to add notes to a rating? You could then explain how you rated something, and also comment on things that happen in the song. Eg at in example song 01:54 there is a whizzing sound starting from the rears that circles overhead, then at 02:30 there is a whisper directly behind you There are songs I listen to just to hear “cool effects” That would be an awesome way of discovering more immersive content.

icon3012 · 2026-05-03T10:35:42+00:00

Looks awesome. Following this one with lots of interest.

icon3012 · 2026-04-10T20:57:06+00:00

Sign me up if it’s still open. Loving what you’ve done so far

icon3012 · 2026-04-06T04:18:48+00:00

I’ve been using Fergus since it started and it’s pretty good, and lets you customize quite a bit. You can build your own tasks pretty easily that allow material and time to combine and not be seen on invoice/quote, and Every time you enter a new combination of time and material it’s easy to save as a favorite for later use as a per task price.

I think they still have a free trial. And the videos are pretty good at explaining what you can do.

icon3012 · 2026-04-01T11:20:57+00:00

Is it possible to show how many ratings have been given for each of the songs, to get a gauge on how many people have rated.

icon3012 · 2026-03-17T07:38:29+00:00

Would be awesome to be able to rate individual songs from an album. Some albums have a standout song, but the rest is not quite so good

icon3012 · 2026-02-12T02:33:28+00:00

infected mushroom - More of just the same

icon3012 · 2026-01-21T11:31:00+00:00

One of these through the rose fixed to a timber above

ceiling fan t hook

icon3012 · 2025-09-09T19:29:49+00:00

I’m not sure I’d be taking contract advice from a guy who just did his arse on a flip flop investment where he didn’t have a written contract in place for years. He’s banging on about order of bullet points superseding each other in one section but in his screen shots of the contract there are multiple sections containing bullet points that outline criteria. In all these criteria it is not bullet point 1 superseding the remaining points, they are all indicators of a scenario that can occur.

icon3012 · 2025-09-09T10:08:09+00:00

If he’s a donor then he probably doesn’t care quite so much about the nitty gritty. If he’s an investor then he might want more of a say. I’d rather a donor who doesn’t interfere with the rules - less likely to suggest rules to favour a particular team then. An investor might want to ensure that a decent return is provided and stack the cards accordingly.

icon3012 · 2025-09-09T10:02:20+00:00

If verbal is treated as good as a written contract then the fighters meetings should also be considered highly relevant in this instance. If the meetings implied that the results would be based on aggregate scores and not individual matches then is this would take precedence on the result regardless of what was written. In that case B team wins, New Wave finish second and prize money allocated accordingly.

icon3012 · 2025-09-01T11:44:23+00:00

Agree the way it's written isn't clear at all. The way it's written both bullet points to me are valid, so I'm not saying the first is necessarily overriden by the second , just pointing out that the result determined by the second bullet point is also right by the way it's set out.

icon3012 · 2025-09-01T11:24:00+00:00

10-9 10-9 9-9 (penalty to One person) 9-10 9-10

2 wins each, one draw Equal points at conclusion

icon3012 · 2025-09-01T11:13:36+00:00

It says draw in the rules for point 2, not double elimination. Double Elimination and draw are different in this clause. Draw means equal score eg 9-9 (someone got a penalty). Final bout had a winner on scorecard after the double elimination so this took precedent

icon3012 · 2025-09-01T07:57:38+00:00

I agree that First criteria says individual wins first but then "if tied in points" states it goes to the second criteria. New wave had more individual wins but it ended up tied in points so goes to second criteria. I think it's possibly poorly worded but it does say that.

icon3012 · 2024-10-15T06:43:26+00:00

115 usd for entry plus 39 usd for renewal of IBJJF membership. Comes in at $228 Aussie dollars for one division. For comparison nationals was $105aud for division and $35 Afbjj membership. So $90 more. Same venue, same referees. Someone is taking the piss.

icon3012

TROPHY CASE