Audio Processor in the IMB Server

[Carsten Kurz]

Really wondering what's on GDCs mind there. One would have to look at the manual or specs for that 'audio processor' module in the SR-1000. EQ etc. in the server towards the AES/EBU outs? But nothing in that analog breakout/switch unit? Weird. They also suggest this solution for their projector targeted at micro-cinemas. They probably see something like a 24plex with 20 small home cinema style rooms, where everything is contained in one device. Maybe the room tuning is done in external crossovers.


edit: The current SR-1000 manual already has a passage on the audio processor option. Not too exciting - it really is just 27 1/3 GEQs for 7 channels, PEQ for LFE, channel gain and delay for the DCP/AES channels. Ist just a bare minimum solution, targeted towards digital input amps.

[Steve Guttag]

Tony, How does one bypass in Q-SYS if an amp or stage speaker fails? Like this...in seconds:

Bypass.JPG

Or, if the client is so inclined (on top of the above), they can have a spare amplifier, already in the rack, already being fed the signal (but in standby).

AmpBypass.JPG

The speaker terminal block on a DPA-Q (CX-Q) are large Phoenix type connectors (can take up to #8 wire) and plug in for up to 4 channels.

It depends on several factors as to amps behind the screen. In the case of above, the amp rack is in its own room, on ground level and the load-center is about 3-feet from it. If the theatre has a baffle wall (and this one does), it is more viable as a speaker room can be created to keep the amps more accessible and keep the gummy bears out. It isn't for EVERY space but one could also have an amplifier "closet" to just keep the amps accessible, and out of the public-eye or casual observance. Remember too, these amps can be up to 8-channels so two amps normally does a typical 7.1 theatre for behind the screen and at 2U each, it isn't a lot of space you are trying to find.

That said, what if they put amplifier modules in the speaker? Installation would be as simple as an Ethernet cable and AC. Design it so the amp module(s) come out easily for service/replacement. But again, it won't be for every space but it could be a good fit if the theatre is designed with access in mind.

[Carsten Kurz]

The asian or chinese market is huge and also has some local offerings for cinema audio processors that we have never heard of elsewhere in the world. Our server has some presets for devices like


FCQA8631: http://www.karp.co.th/karp-product/2033/

CSP850A: http://www.shh-audio.com/wap/list.php?tid=27

DCP1000: http://www.cinetech.cn/product/228.shtml

[Marcel Birgelen]

Marcel, don't forget, it is an incomplete solution. They (GDC) have their Audio D-A box (since, like Dolby, you can't put analog into a projector without noise) that adds into it and it, seemingly, only does 8-channels so a 7.1 system requires yet another D-A converter. If we're comparing same-same, I can likely get the break-even on a QSYS system in at under 8-screens. For instance, a CORE-NANO can handle 2-3 screens (64-channel capability) and the DCIO really becomes THE processor part per screen and that is less than an IMS3000's audio upgrade. Enough less that a pair of CORE Nanos and three DCIOs is on par with the added costs of audio into the IMS3000.

Now, if these server companies were to have an AES67 output (the IMS3000 does but it is only activated for their internal audio processor and ATMOS), then even the DCIO becomes non-required.

I'm not saying there won't be "some" appeal to the sound processor on-board but then you have speaker crossovers to contend with too. Dolby's solution, since they use the AES67 spigot can do the crossovers internally or on their DMA. How about on GDC's? It's not a complete solution and you are putting some processing on the outside.

Dolby, especially in their current incarnation, is more of a licensing company than a hardware company. For them to ask a licensing fee for extra features is almost understandable, though they may reconsider some of their pricing models, as long as they stay away from those dreaded subscription models... For GDC not to include AES67 or something comparable like Dante is hard to understand, now you're still stuck with some form of 19" breakout box that needs to find some room not too far away from the projector. GDC already needs to support some form of digital EQ, so they may as well include digital crossover processing inside their on-board processor, it's not like this is rocket science anno 2021.

For this niche market to survive in a post-pandemic situation, it needs to shift its focus to smaller installs. I don't see that many new multiplexes with "big rooms" being built in the following years.

The more I think about it, I'm convinced the future will be more about active speakers directly hooked up to AES67, whether we like it or not. The more fancy installs will throw in an extra processor like a QSys Core, but the smaller installs will just be driven from what's in the projector. There are already quite a few AES67/Dante compatible active speakers on the market, the gig-industry has been using active speakers and line-arrays for ages and I think we will only be months away from some of the major players offering a line specifically targeted at cinemas, screening rooms and professional home-theater applications.

[Steve Guttag]

Dolby, especially in their current incarnation, is more of a licensing company than a hardware company.

Ummmm...that is just factually wrong. Dolby is more of a hardware company, than it has EVER been, with respect to cinemas. For cinemas, Dolby used to "make" cinema processors (typically 2-3 items with some having a variation or two and accessories to those products). For instance a CP100 and CP50 with the CP50 having the "R" option for remote fader. The CP100 was dropped when the CP200 came out...and one can follow that path of a high and low processor for most of the cinema processor life. You didn't really get another set of products until Dolby Digital came out for film and then, you got 2 items (the DA-x0 and the CAT 699 followed by the CAT 70x). Still not a hefty product line up.

Now, they have, that they are directly responsible for manufacturing:

• Cinema Audio processors (CP850, CP950...though I think when the CP950A hits the streets, the CP850 won't have a purpose).
• Cinema Server (IMS3000)
• Multichannel Amplifier (in three variants but still, essentially one product that can be configured by how it is stuffed with 2 out of the 3 having analog input capability). This is a new product line for them to be in too.
• ADA equipment (Fidelio and Captiview). While they didn't invent them, they did buy the company that did and are now responsible for their manufacture.
• And entire line of speakers with a lot of "SKUs". Like with Doremi, they bought SLS but they are now responsible for their manufacture. And, like with Doremi, Dolby has now had their hand in revamping the speaker line and putting their own design philosophies into it. Witness the new 133 and 136 stage speakers with the Vari-intense...er asymmetrical horn design.
  https://vimeopro.com/dolbycinemasupp...ideo/474890056

Licensing options are what? Audio on the IMS3000, ATMOS on the IMS3000 or CP850 and I'm sure for the Dolby Vision/Dolby Cinema. Once film left, Dolby lost their lock on licensing their proprietary noise reduction and digital audio. Even Dolby ATMOS, with the new DCI/SMPTE standards can be reproduced by others.

As for GDC not putting AES67 in...in their defense, the SR-1000 is an existing product. They can't magically put new audio spigots in. They would require revving the product (which would also require a whole new DCI compliance plus other agency approvals. It is quite impressive that they had the horsepower and put forth the time to put in the "b-chain" processing they did..as an option. I, personally, think it will have limited appeal but they are not dumb, there is a reason it is there as an option.

You and I are definitely not on the same page with respect to how cinemas will need to be built. I think it is the exact opposite. The closer you build a cinema that looks/feels like a home cinema, the less the draw is to leave the home. I think it will be the big-bold cinemas that provide a "night out" that are going to be the survivors. It will be the big screens, big sound, big experience (and put in the damn masking and curtains!!!!).

As for amplified speakers...we'll see. I'd like it as an option. I think a company, like QSC, could revamp their LF cabinets to have a slot that could house one of their amps and use the LF driver as the "fan." Make it so one can order the speaker with or without the amp. They definitely have the "know-how" for both technologies.

I'm not too worried about non-cinema entities pushing their equipment in cinema. They have in the past too. Just because a speaker is active doesn't mean it is good or suited to the space. Meyer is on-board with active speakers but their prices will keep most away despite their reputation for an outstanding product.

[Carsten Kurz]

Amplified speakers mean even more wiring than now. Yes, not necessarily a strict star as now with loudspeaker cables, but still multiple digital audio and power daisy-chain lanes. Yes, you can buy special cables nowadays that carries power and data in one jacket, but...

Plus the added weight per speaker, which is always a problem loadwise for these huge object based audio installations. Plus, more complexity per device means more failures per device. How often do you want to go up under the ceiling to replace a speaker? Will a single defective one take down all the others in the chain?

[Steve Guttag]

With AES3/AES67/Dante/QLAN being an effective means of getting audio to an amplified speaker (as if running a 2-cond/shield analog cable was hard), I fail to see how running one of those cables is any harder than running a heavy copper speaker cable multiplied by the number of "ways" the speaker has. This leaves power. So now, in a cinema specification, suitable power has to be behind the screen. I've run into zero issues with that request. As for fire protection, the laws (at least in my areas) seemed to have changed to require sprinklers behind the screen plane, regardless of power or not so that is no longer a negative cost factor associated with power behind the screen.

It really just comes down to cost and serviceability. For some sites, it is easier, for others it is harder. One site we put amps behind the screen had speaker lofts. The ease of getting to amps, while not quite on par with going into a booth, it isn't hugely harder either. And speaker cable wiring was MUCH easier (and cheaper). I dare say, with Q-SYS, I have more monitoring/information on those amplifiers behind the screen than most people have on their amps that are in the booth staring right at them.

[Marcel Birgelen]

I also don't see the power wiring as a big problem. The fact that you can get rid of traditional star-cabling may actually be an advantage. As for the weight of the speakers: This really is just a limited problem for ceiling speakers. But looking at the overall weight increase, I doubt it will be much more than 25% for any speaker.

Ummmm...that is just factually wrong. Dolby is more of a hardware company, than it has EVER been, with respect to cinemas. For cinemas, Dolby used to "make" cinema processors (typically 2-3 items with some having a variation or two and accessories to those products). For instance a CP100 and CP50 with the CP50 having the "R" option for remote fader. The CP100 was dropped when the CP200 came out...and one can follow that path of a high and low processor for most of the cinema processor life. You didn't really get another set of products until Dolby Digital came out for film and then, you got 2 items (the DA-x0 and the CAT 699 followed by the CAT 70x). Still not a hefty product line up.

I don't have the exact numbers right here and it wasn't my intention to go that route, in the first place but the point is: A large part of Dolby's business has, during most if not al of its existence been about licensing. I'm not just talking about cinema here, but about the licensing of their technologies, be it their noise cancelling schemes or be it one of their surround codecs and technology stacks. Dolby has their logo printed on millions of devices and thousands of movie posters, it occurs to me that this part has to be a pretty substantial part of their business. So, I don't think there is anything wrong with calling Dolby a licensing business that also happens to run a hardware division.

You and I are definitely not on the same page with respect to how cinemas will need to be built. I think it is the exact opposite. The closer you build a cinema that looks/feels like a home cinema, the less the draw is to leave the home. I think it will be the big-bold cinemas that provide a "night out" that are going to be the survivors. It will be the big screens, big sound, big experience (and put in the damn masking and curtains!!!!).

I don't know if we differ that much, really... You really think I like to go out to that special crappy place that spared every expense besides a screen and a projector, to call itself cinema? Well, maybe I do, to have a laugh or two and a chuckle, maybe also cry little bit because of the lost potential, but I definitely don't go there to enjoy a movie.

My point was more to get some kind of discussion rolling about how the post-pandemic future of this industry will look like. Maybe my view is a bit too extreme (I somehow doubt that actually ), but it's a discussion, not an assertion of facts:

- I honestly think that the traditional multiplex will have a hard time. And I don't need any special Uri Geller mental powers to see this coming and you can't honestly tell me you don't see it either: Mediocre quality, delivered as a mass product just because you've got a time-limited exclusivity on a product, a big budget Hollywood release in most cases, is going the way of the dodo. If you look at what Disney is doing, then you'll see that day and date will be here to stay.
- I don't think that cinema is dead though, because people still want to go out. People want to have shared experiences and big movie releases still have the potential to be such events. People may even be willing to spend more per ticket than they spent before the pandemic, but they will demand a quality product. As such, I do think there will be ample room for BIG cinema experiences. Experiences that can blow you away, going even further than what we're willing to do right now. I see big LED displays instead of crappy 2K projections, sound that's even more "multi-dimensional" than our current MDA systems allow for. Cinema done right, with "no expenses spared". People will still pay for that, I'm absolutely sure, but it will continue to be a technological race, which isn't always bad, we should strive for progress, after all.

That still leaves us with a whole lot of unfulfilled potential. Like a lot of multiplexes with a lot of rooms that need something to fill them. For that, maybe there is a market in more personal experiences. People who want to rent their own "private little cinema" for example, and want to play the movie THEY want, from a broad library of available titles, or maybe they bring it themselves, maybe they simply want to watch that Netflix show on a big screen? Maybe they want to play some video games on a "largish" screen and good surround sound system? Maybe they do want some karaoke? Maybe they just want to do a business presentation?

And last but not least, with the price of big display and sound technology coming down with each iteration, there may be a whole swath of people out there, that now want to invest into their "private screening rooms". Maybe they're not satisfied with their current iteration of "home theater tech" and want something closer to the real thing? Maybe they don't want to be stuck with just playing Blu-Rays or crappy, highly compressed content from Netflix? Why wouldn't Hollywood want to serve them with the same, high quality DCI content that they're dishing out to cinemas? With high-speed broadband slowly but steadily gaining some steam, delivering those movies right to their home via broadband will actually become a viable option. Maybe this isn't a market you're interested in, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

As for amplified speakers...we'll see. I'd like it as an option. I think a company, like QSC, could revamp their LF cabinets to have a slot that could house one of their amps and use the LF driver as the "fan." Make it so one can order the speaker with or without the amp. They definitely have the "know-how" for both technologies.

I'm not too worried about non-cinema entities pushing their equipment in cinema. They have in the past too. Just because a speaker is active doesn't mean it is good or suited to the space. Meyer is on-board with active speakers but their prices will keep most away despite their reputation for an outstanding product.

Meyer also uses line arrays for their bigger installs, which are somewhat of a controversial subject, which I'm not too afraid of to avoid. I hate the line "to think outside of the box", but sometimes, this industry should just literally do just that...

[Steve Guttag]

Yes, Dolby has ALWAYS been an IP company but you did present your argument as somehow they've changed to be more so and less into hardware manufacture (in their current incarnation). They don't make home anything, they license it. They've always made commercial products and augmented it with licensing. I would think that most of their pro-audio (recording studios, radio stations...etc.) is pretty much dead and left right with analog. That leaves cinema in the professional world...where manufacturing is THE products they have. ATMOS is about the only licensed one (and Dolby Vision/Dolby Cinema). They've had to back down from licensing "4K" and "Captions." ATMOS is but a small percentage of what goes into cinemas so the rest is hardware.

And yes, I do think that multiplex cinemas will continue to survive. If they are crappy, they will need to be in smaller, unserved markets and likely but subrun. Remember, I don't care what walk of life you are, most people want to "go out" and if you are of limited means, you are going to a local cinema, even if it isn't the latest technology. You just want to be entertained and not be at home. I think the latter part of 2021 and 2022 will bear that our as various countries/localities get vaccinated and out from under the pandemic. The first though on people's minds on "what should we do" will not be "let's stay home tonight."

[Mark Gulbrandsen]

Yes, Dolby has ALWAYS been an IP company but you did present your argument as somehow they've changed to be more so and less into hardware manufacture (in their current incarnation). They don't make home anything, they license it. They've always made commercial products and augmented it with licensing. I would think that most of their pro-audio (recording studios, radio stations...etc.) is pretty much dead and left right with analog. That leaves cinema in the professional world...where manufacturing is THE products they have. ATMOS is about the only licensed one (and Dolby Vision/Dolby Cinema). They've had to back down from licensing "4K" and "Captions." ATMOS is but a small percentage of what goes into cinemas so the rest is hardware.

And yes, I do think that multiplex cinemas will continue to survive. If they are crappy, they will need to be in smaller, unserved markets and likely but subrun. Remember, I don't care what walk of life you are, most people want to "go out" and if you are of limited means, you are going to a local cinema, even if it isn't the latest technology. You just want to be entertained and not be at home. I think the latter part of 2021 and 2022 will bear that our as various countries/localities get vaccinated and out from under the pandemic. The first though on people's minds on "what should we do" will not be "let's stay home tonight."

Yes, When Ray passed on and set up Dolby to be run by a BOD, it has primarily become a licensing firm. I believe the BOD sees equipment manufacturing in the now more fast paced digital age as a trite too risky. I can remember being told in the Second ever D-Cinema class that the Cinema Servers could disappear from production at literally any time and don't be surprised if they do. It also seems as Dolby buys up other companies and or their designs rather than investing their own skill brewing up new and very innovative products like they used to do. All that died when Ray did.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Yes, Dolby has ALWAYS been an IP company but you did present your argument as somehow they've changed to be more so and less into hardware manufacture (in their current incarnation). They don't make home anything, they license it. They've always made commercial products and augmented it with licensing. I would think that most of their pro-audio (recording studios, radio stations...etc.) is pretty much dead and left right with analog. That leaves cinema in the professional world...where manufacturing is THE products they have. ATMOS is about the only licensed one (and Dolby Vision/Dolby Cinema). They've had to back down from licensing "4K" and "Captions." ATMOS is but a small percentage of what goes into cinemas so the rest is hardware.

Steve, I really don't want to argue about this right here, as I don't think it adds anything to the discussion. But... I do it anyway.

Like Mark also indicated, Dolby really is a licensing company first, that's also represented by their financial statements. I can't comment if the internal politics of the company really changed after Ray Dolby passed away though, I don't know the company the way as some of you around here do. But it wouldn't be uncommon for a company to become more "corporate" after their original founder(s) have passed away.

Last year, they made $ 1,079M from licenses and $ 83M from "Products AND Services", so again, my statement that Dolby is a licensing operation that also sells hardware is 100% true. Sure, 2020 was a bad year for selling Cinema products and services, but their hardware operations have been just a fraction of their revenue for the last 5 years. (I didn't look past that, but I doubt it was much different before then.)

That doesn't indicate they don't take their hardware division seriously, as you indicated, they acquired SLS a while ago and are now assimilating their speaker ranges. If they would really want to drop their hardware division, you'd not expect them to make such an acquisition. But I can imagine that the viability of the "cinema hardware division" has been on the agenda during quite a few boardroom meetings.

And yes, I do think that multiplex cinemas will continue to survive. If they are crappy, they will need to be in smaller, unserved markets and likely but subrun. Remember, I don't care what walk of life you are, most people want to "go out" and if you are of limited means, you are going to a local cinema, even if it isn't the latest technology. You just want to be entertained and not be at home. I think the latter part of 2021 and 2022 will bear that our as various countries/localities get vaccinated and out from under the pandemic. The first though on people's minds on "what should we do" will not be "let's stay home tonight."

What I agree on is that I expect to see a pretty hard rebound, after restrictions have been lifted. Many people have been stuck at home for the better part of a year now and just want to get out. Even the traditional multiplex will initially benefit from this, but I don't expect this rebound to last. Once life for most people has returned to somewhat pre-pandemic normality, I'm afraid the hard truth will set in. The simple fact that the theatrical release window has largely vanished by then and people will start to demand "a bang for their buck" or they will simply spend their money on other "cheap" out of home entertainment. This will probably happen much sooner than most people anticipate. That's why I do think the industry needs to adapt and it needs to adapt quickly. After an initial rebound, I simply don't expect us to party like it's 1999... there needs to be change and maybe it's a worthwhile discussion of how this change could look like.

[Steve Guttag]

Marcel you may not want to argue but you certainly do. I never said they were not an IP company...however, as they relate to cinema, they are primarily a hardware company now. The software they make for cinema primarily goes into THEIR hardware (servers, amps, sound processors). The numbers you put up are going to include consumer and yes, that is all IP. Your statement that started this whole spat was that somehow Dolby had changed in their manufacture/IP relationship...and it hasn't. They ALWAYS licensed their consumer designs. (Dolby-B, Dolby-C, Dolby-S..etc.) There is no change there. Dolby has always made their professional products (even in the analog days...the NR cards were made by Dolby). If they licensed their NR to other manufacture, it wouldn't be on any large scale. There hasn't been a change, as you are Mark has implied.

Now, what Mark said about Dolby getting out of the cinema business, back then, was certainly true. For digital cinema, what sort of hooks do they have in the digital cinema world? It is evident how little pull they had in that the DSS line of servers was ranked #3 in the world (depending on the country, they were higher or perhaps even lower but as a world-wide statement, they were #3). What was the difference in presentation with a Dolby server versus other brands? Picture and Sound were the same...all Dolby had to sell on was their user interface (something the bean counters don't see nor do patrons) and Dolby was a more costly server. So yeah, seeing them pull out was a possibility. Other evidence is that Dolby never developed their own IMB. The bought USL's and that was clearly not their first pick. For whatever reason, they decided to keep cinema and run with it. Their acquisition of Doremi, the #1 cinema server company (worldwide sales) bought their way back into the market...still without any requirement to use Dolby. However, Dolby HAS developed cinema specific products, like the DMA. They've revved the IMS twice with clearly the IMS2000 a continuation of the IMS1000 with a Dolby faceplate badge. The IMS3000 has more of a Dolby influence. I would say that Dolby is firmly committed to the cinema market since they now manufacture everything but the content and the projector.

This discussion seems to be heading down a similar one I saw between you and Bobby on fonts. Nothing you've presented changes the facts and it just seems like you are trying to save face. Regardless, I'm leaving it off here, as far as my part...you may continue on, if it makes you feel better.

[Marcel Birgelen]

Marcel you may not want to argue but you certainly do. I never said they were not an IP company...however, as they relate to cinema, they are primarily a hardware company now. The software they make for cinema primarily goes into THEIR hardware (servers, amps, sound processors). The numbers you put up are going to include consumer and yes, that is all IP. Your statement that started this whole spat was that somehow Dolby had changed in their manufacture/IP relationship...and it hasn't. They ALWAYS licensed their consumer designs. (Dolby-B, Dolby-C, Dolby-S..etc.) There is no change there. Dolby has always made their professional products (even in the analog days...the NR cards were made by Dolby). If they licensed their NR to other manufacture, it wouldn't be on any large scale. There hasn't been a change, as you are Mark has implied.

Really Steve, this is just nitpicking around some subtle differences of interpretation of what "Dolby" refers to. When I said Dolby, I was referring to the company as a whole. Nothing I said is false and other discussions about fonts are entirely irrelevant to this one. As about saving face: I present the numbers right in your face. (Yeah, I feel mighty clever now.) Dolby is a licensing company. What Dolby was I referring to? Well, that company that made more than 90% of their revenue from licensing last year... And hey, nothing you presented here makes Dolby, the company, NOT a licensing company first. Is this at all relevant for the discussion? I still don't think so. Does this make me feel better? Well... at least I can sleep at night now.

For whatever reason, they decided to keep cinema and run with it. Their acquisition of Doremi, the #1 cinema server company (worldwide sales) bought their way back into the market...still without any requirement to use Dolby. However, Dolby HAS developed cinema specific products, like the DMA. They've revved the IMS twice with clearly the IMS2000 a continuation of the IMS1000 with a Dolby faceplate badge. The IMS3000 has more of a Dolby influence. I would say that Dolby is firmly committed to the cinema market since they now manufacture everything but the content and the projector

For me there is a clear reason why Dolby wants to stay relevant in the cinema business. It's not because it feeds directly into their bottom-line, because it doesn't, really. But the stuff they currently license to the world and get most of their revenue from has largely found their origins in the cinema space. Stuff like Dolby Digital Surround in its many incarnations and also Dolby Atmos all started in the cinema space and still has, to this day, a lot of exposure there. Them being on every movie poster, being in almost every cinematic trailer and them being represented with big, bold trailers at the start of the show surely gives them a lot of credibility and recognition. Without that credibility and name recognition, it will be much harder to sell those millions of licenses to those manufacturers that end-up putting a logo on one of their boxes. If they exit the cinema space, they could quickly become as relevant as THX is today, as their technology certainly isn't irreplaceable and their licensing certainly isn't cheap.

[Steve Guttag]

So, it looks like GDC's plan is to do the speaker crossovers in the SR-1000. However, there are only 16-channels of AES audio outputs so things will be pretty tight. For bi-amping, 9/10 are available and/or 15/16. If you omit 7.1, 11/12 could free up. Things are going to be tight.

Their D-A converter is only for 8-channels so some choices will need to be made there and/or augmentation (additional D-A converters)

Capture.JPG


it is probably still best to plan on amplifiers that have crossovers or use some 3rd party external crossovers (like mini-DSP).

[Carsten Kurz]

So the internal EQs and crossovers can not be used for analog sources through the AIB-2000. Complete rubbish the way they sell it. A conventional CP is still needed.

https://www.gdc-tech.com/ndownload/p...2_20210401.pdf