That's a good point. Having only used the amp for 2.0 setup with my floorstanders I've never really investigated HEOS capability. I've just done some reading but couldn't find anything about HEOS surround, what did you find that makes you think it's not possible? I actually just sent a ticket to Marantz support to ask them. Shame that Atmos isn't supported though.
This occurred to me during a very boring meeting at work. lol. I don't know why I hadn't realised that before. So actually on the flipside a passive soundbar might mean less cabling up from the unit to the TV arm. As it would be just the TV and soundbar - from the amp. As opposed to every single device (Sky, ATV, Bluray etc.).
I am now re-thining the idea of keeping the receiver and finding a passive soundbar. I'm not sure I could convince my girlfriend but we still have builders in doing all sorts, and for one he is in next week doing skirting in our dining room (we've had walls taken down, a new kitchen etc. it's a long story). So potentially asking him to replace the skirting from the alcove unit round to behind the sofa (maybe 4m worth) with rebated skirting i.e. a channel for speaker cables is entirely possibly and I'd like to think not a huge cost either. That could all feasibly be done before the decorators come in and it hence could be done
very well and hidden.
So that leads me to
more questions... (arrgh!)
- If a wired 5.1 setup using my receiver and a passive soundbar would be better than an Atmos soundbar/sub/rear setup. Or if I'd miss Atmos.
- Or even, going back to basics, would a 3.0 passive soundbar with sub actually sound better than an Atmos soundbar with sub (and no rears)
- If the above setup would be better for music (meaning the passive soundbar)
- If there would be any way to add Atmos speakers without running more cables. (I ended up in a rabbit hole of looking at the Rocketfish wireless speaker kit etc.)
Lastly, back to the original question about ventilation (lol), the carpenter was round taking measurements earlier and his suggestion rather than grills on the front of doors, was to open up the skirting on/against the floor. A bit like this but on the cupboards (not the weird middle thing they've got going on here);
https://imgur.com/Td4prg8
Re: no Heos rear surround with the 5012. I had a quick look at the manual and also checked some product comparison sites. There's also this from the Marantz web site.
https://support.marantz.com/app/ans...-speakers-compatibility-with-marantz-products It suggests that the Marantz range doesn't support Heos speakers as rears... at all!
Side note. Your receiver is 7.2 (7 ground channels + 2x subs). That means the most you're going to get in an Atmos configuration is 5.2.2 (5 ground, 2 subs, 2 (a stereo pair) Atmos speakers). This then means that the Atmos speakers can't be rears. They have to be front or mids. The amp doesn't support dedicated Atmos rears. You would need a 9.2 amp for that, and for it to be configured as 5.x.4 (5 ground, 1 or 2 subs, 2x pairs of Atmos speakers - 2 front, 2 rear) Read more from the Dolby site with layout pictures of all the various configurations here:
https://www.dolby.com/about/support....1.2-dolby-atmos-enabled-speaker-setup-guide/ FYI - the site shows upfirers I think mainly because this is the easiest route for most people retrofitting. Real speakers located where the sound is supposed to be coming from will always trump reflected sound speakers.
I think that with the builders in that this is the perfect opportunity to run and hide cabling. More than that; it's the perfect time to plan to run cables in case you might change the amp and add any extra channels. Compared to the cost, disruption and mess of opening up walls a couple of year after the room has been fitted, decorated and furnished, running some extra wiring now is the cheap and quick option.
I'm going to keep coming back to this because I think it's really important. The angle of reflected sound with upfirers really needs some thought. In very basic terms, if you go for upfirers, and the sound bounces off your ceiling but doesn't reflect back to where you're sitting -
if it misses you - then you're going to be disappointed with the results and she's going to wonder why you spent good money on this.
There are a couple of other things to think about as well.
1) Volume matters: Sound dissipates over distance. (look up the inverse square law) So, if the sound has to fire up and then reflect off the ceiling before finally reaching you then those speakers are going to have to be driven harder than the main channels in order to keep up. Harder working speakers means harder working amps, and harder working amps means more heat. That is one of your prime concerns: heat. That's what started this discussion.
You're running 2 channels with the Marantz and have USB cooling fans fitted. Think about how it will be running all 7 channels and with the amp parked inside a box.
2) In-ceiling speakers work better, but they cost a lot and take extra effort to install. Also, the sound from them goes up into the room above as well as down to where you're sitting. There are ways to minimise this such as with Dynamat, but there still some extra noise there you should plan (and cost) for if this is the direction you might head.
Here's an alternative solution: Have a think about front presence speakers. These are mounted up high on the front wall, and angled down so that they fire at where you're sitting. These can be good, ordinary speakers. Something with decent sensitivity that are going to give the amp an easier time to run. Have a look at used Monitor Audio Radius 90 speakers. The older versions with 87dB/W/m sensitivity, not the newer ones that are 84dB. They even come in room friendly colours - e.g. white
Have a read here of the results from someone trying exactly this sort of layout. It works for Atmos and for non-Atmos content too.
https://www.avsforum.com/threads/svs-prime-5-1-4-atmos-speaker-system-review.2141362/
This could allow you to have the 3 channel passive centre, then some discrete front heights with the cables hidden up the walls, and that just leaves you with the 'rear' cables to hide for the side surrounds.
Atmos (and/or presence) vs standard 5.1: The extra channels do help lift the lid of the room. However, for the effect to come alive then the sound level has to be 'sufficient'. It's not going to be noticeable if you're just cruising along barely louder than the TV speakers can play. That wouldn't stop me putting the wiring in ready. But it might encourage me to do this in stages if my significant other was so worried about the neighbours. Front channels & sub first. Then add side surrounds. Then add presence speakers.
Sound quality: There are some very good sound bar systems now if you're prepared to throw down a chunk of cash. 'A chunk' generally means something north of a grand, and maybe as much as £2-2.5K. For someone only interested in TV and movie sound then it's getting harder to justify a traditional AV receiver speaker package system. It still holds the high ground, but with so much being watched via streaming, and where the best that sound gets is DVD quality lossy DD5.1 (+Atmos), then for many the convenience of a sound bar or wireless speaker system tilts the balance. It's not as good, but it's good enough.
What separates the men from the boys is music. A good amp with decent speakers.... that's where sound bars struggle to compete.
Re: adding Atmos speakers without extra cabling. With your current amp, see what I wrote above.
The back I'm not so worried about - we'll just have a big slit/slot along the back (like in your pic) and hope it's not too visibly. Probably won't be with the telly in front of it anyway. I'll also get him to put a million slot holes in the shelves I guess!
)
)
Before I had any idea I would end up buying a place for myself in London I had grand plans for a proper 7.1/Atmos setup and sniffed at those poor souls that "made do" with soundbar setups. But now I live in the real world where I feel very lucky to have my own place, but a cinema room it certainly isn't!
