5.1 worth the trouble over Stereo?

[CNV]

Just bought a X-Fi xtremegamer soundcard for a new gaming rig I'm building... This is my first computer where I'm making sound a priority, instead of using onboard sound with cheap $10 head phones and speakers.

So is 5.1 worth the trouble over a nice stereo set? 5.1 is a little difficult to arrange on a computer desk, and I want to know is it worth the trouble. I only play BF2 at the moment and do not watch any movies on the computer. Movies and console games are played and watched in the living room and there is already a 5.1 system there.

 

[phide]

In my opinion, yes. If you can accommodate 5.1 with a bit of work, then you should absolutely do so. And if you decide to go that route, don't half-ass it. Try to follow proper guidelines for speaker arrangement. That means not sticking rears to your side, which means not placing them on your desk. The optimal speaker arrangement is radial, with surrounds almost completely behind you.

Just don't neglect the importance of speaker quality. You'll not likely be listening in surround for the majority of your time, so make sure the speakers are passable in stereo.

 

[CNV]

Thats the problem right now... I don't know where can I place the rear speakers. My desk is U shaped, so the rear speakers will be to my side, and not the my rear. The wall behind me is about 20' away, so I can't mount it on the wall. Still worth it?

 

[nigerian_businessman]

I'm gonna go against the grain here and say no. Positional audio processing + a good set of headphones will eliminate any detriment to 2.1 in gaming, and unless you have the will to do it properly, it's a big waste of time. Don't get me wrong, surround sound is more immersive and generally better than 2.1. There is nothing like playing BF2 and hearing a chopper buzz over your head from your front left to right rear without that fake positional audio sound, but to get that real effect you either need to wall mount the speakers behind you or get some stands and pull them out when you're gaming. If you don't mind the hassle of pulling out the stands for times when you need 5.1, go for it! I just think that it's a very cumbersome solution and more hassle than it's worth. And the poster who mentioned getting good speakers was right -- I bought the z680s a few years ago and they're still meeting my needs today, considering they were about $300 and I've gotten nearly 4 years out of them, with no real end in sight, they were definately worth the initial high price of entry. Don't skimp or you'll regret it later.

 

[Donnie27]

Just bought a X-Fi xtremegamer soundcard for a new gaming rig I'm building... This is my first computer where I'm making sound a priority, instead of using onboard sound with cheap $10 head phones and speakers.

So is 5.1 worth the trouble over a nice stereo set? 5.1 is a little difficult to arrange on a computer desk, and I want to know is it worth the trouble. I only play BF2 at the moment and do not watch any movies on the computer. Movies and console games are played and watched in the living room and there is already a 5.1 system there.

Yes! With 20' to work with, you might think about 6 or 7.1.

 

[H-street]

So is 5.1 worth the trouble over a nice stereo set? 5.1 is a little difficult to arrange on a computer desk, and I want to know is it worth the trouble.

its not the best solution, but if you angle the rear speakers towards the back, at the far right and left of your desk so the sound is not coming towards you, you can still get a good surround sound effect..

computer spearks have always been a real PIA when it comes to surround sound, i eventually broke down and just went witha home theatre setup and ran the speakers based on the room, not the desk..



personally, for me its worth it if you go with a good setup, if not i'd probably stick to headphones just for the convenience and you still get great sound (argueably better sound than from speakers)..

 

[alg7_munif]

Thats the problem right now... I don't know where can I place the rear speakers. My desk is U shaped, so the rear speakers will be to my side, and not the my rear. The wall behind me is about 20' away, so I can't mount it on the wall. Still worth it?

If you see here, the surround speakers should be placed at the side.

 

[Donnie27]

Just bought a X-Fi xtremegamer soundcard for a new gaming rig I'm building... This is my first computer where I'm making sound a priority, instead of using onboard sound with cheap $10 head phones and speakers.

So is 5.1 worth the trouble over a nice stereo set? 5.1 is a little difficult to arrange on a computer desk, and I want to know is it worth the trouble. I only play BF2 at the moment and do not watch any movies on the computer. Movies and console games are played and watched in the living room and there is already a 5.1 system there.

Here.

My old BOSE 301's are behind me since they need room to reflect from the sides. I liked 6.1 better.

 

[Audioguy]

In a 5.1 Dolby Digital setup the Rear Channels should be to the sides of the head and slightly to the back. Never right behind. With a older 5.1 Dolby Prologic setup the surrounds are meant to be behind the user. With a 7.1 system you have both speakers to the side and to the rear. Dolby's website has lot of info on setting up speaker system for the optimal sound. You obviously can't always ge the perfect placement for speakers sometimes you have to make sacrifices. That website show various setups that will still give optimal sound. Remember that the rear channel and other delays are there to be used and they help balance out the soundfeild properly.
I love 5.1 and would never go back to stereo.

 

[Donnie27]

In a 5.1 Dolby Digital setup the Rear Channels should be to the sides of the head and slightly to the back. Never right behind. With a older 5.1 Dolby Prologic setup the surrounds are meant to be behind the user. With a 7.1 system you have both speakers to the side and to the rear. Dolby's website has lot of info on setting up speaker system for the optimal sound. You obviously can't always ge the perfect placement for speakers sometimes you have to make sacrifices. That website show various setups that will still give optimal sound. Remember that the rear channel and other delays are there to be used and they help balance out the soundfeild properly.
I love 5.1 and would never go back to stereo.

Just bought a X-Fi xtremegamer

You don't set up the rear as you would with DD because X-Fi are a lot different. The Calibration Tool helps with speaker placement as well as the THX console. X-Fi asks for speakers to be placed behind the listener, NOT to the sides. When you do Sound Check or test sounds, the speakers sound off;
Left Front,
Center,
Right Front,
Rear Right
Rear Left
and then noise for the Sub.

They don't say side or surround

 

[alg7_munif]

You mean that if you play a movie with a DD track, X-Fi will make some "changes" to the surround channel so that the sound will be suitable with rear speaker placement? Sheesh.

 

[Donnie27]

You mean that if you play a movie with a DD track, X-Fi will make some "changes" to the surround channel so that the sound will be suitable with rear speaker placement? Sheesh.

YES! Sheesh! It's where the sound card asks for them to be placed. Even for folks who can't read instructions

 

[alg7_munif]

Do you move your speakers around if you connect your receiver to your X-Fi with analogue and digital at the same time? If you use analogue for games and DD/DTS passthrough for movies, should your speakers be placed according to Creative or Dolby?

 

[Audioguy]

I would take Dolby's word for it myself seeing how they are the ones who developed "DOLBY DIGITAL" What does the X-fi do to the signal that you need to move the channels way back there to fix? They are to the sides of the head and slightly to the rear but not way behind like your talking.
It would definaltey mess up the Dolby Digital imaging if the rears were behind. Similar to this picture:
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/home_entertainment/roomlayout.html

 

[Donnie27]

Do you move your speakers around if you connect your receiver to your X-Fi with analogue and digital at the same time? If you use analogue for games and DD/DTS passthrough for movies, should your speakers be placed according to Creative or Dolby?

The X-Fi adjust sound to the position of the Speakers. I'm sure Creative knows Speakers are to the sides and slightly to the rear for DD. I don't move my speakers as the Sound placement is adjusted at the card and by the Receiver. No, it's not Carver and Martin Logans but it gets the job done. With Passthrough, my Receiver adjusts the sound and asks for the same damned speaker placement. But one more time, I watch DVD's downstairs in my Den not on my Computer except for maybe a short scene.

I'll go with the Approved by THX Creative X-Fi method=P Is that simple enough? He asked about speaker placement on an X-Fi. Again, Creative accounts for the Speaker placements for DD, DTS and etc.. from the same location. Now please TRY IT before you go on closing your mind please?

Let's let them say it; "Bundled with all Creative THX Certified sound cards is the THX Setup Console. With it, you can have precise control and calibration of your speakers, ensuring that you'll be in the audio sweet spot in any speaker layout and configuration."

 

[Donnie27]

I would take Dolby's word for it myself seeing how they are the ones who developed "DOLBY DIGITAL" What does the X-fi do to the signal that you need to move the channels way back there to fix? They are to the sides of the head and slightly to the rear but not way behind like your talking.
It would definaltey mess up the Dolby Digital imaging if the rears were behind. Similar to this picture:
http://www.dolby.com/consumer/home_entertainment/roomlayout.html

http://www.av-outlet.com/en-us/dept_140.html

Did you read that link as well? If I'm using a Set Top unit, I place my Speakers accordingly. If I'm using a X-Fi, I use those set up instructions as well.

 

[Audioguy]

Man, you believe everything a company tells you? How many diagrams can you find that show you the correct way to setup 5.1?
Set up your speakers how ever you like. What I am saying is for audio I am more likley to trust the Audio engineers at Dolby Labs then some guy at Creative. Could it be perhaps the diagram is a bit off? Optimal placement is and will always be the same. If you want to jam a set of speakers behind you because you are misinterpreting a diagram, when every other diagram shows you the proper way ot do it go ahead. I understand why you watch movies upstairs, your audio is messed up in movies on the PC. Enjoy your movie's

 

[alg7_munif]

http://www.av-outlet.com/en-us/dept_140.html

Did you read that link as well? If I'm using a Set Top unit, I place my Speakers accordingly. If I'm using a X-Fi, I use those set up instructions as well.

The pic shows that for 5.1 setup, the surround speaker is placed by your side right?

 

[phide]

In a 5.1 Dolby Digital setup the Rear Channels should be to the sides of the head and slightly to the back. Never right behind.

For THX certification for a mixing environment, speaker placement is extremely significant, and their specs outline theater-like placement (slight-rear sides). This depends on the application, however.

Dolby has actually changed position a bit on speaker placement in recent years (five years, maybe). Note in the DD diagrams that the radial convention is not followed:

Creative documentation calls for radial, behind-the-listener placement because this is how game audio is mixed. Audio events cued directly behind the listener are designed to be reproduced behind the listener, not to the slight-behind sides. Placing rears to the side, in this case, severely cripples imaging. This isn't card specific, either. The same convention applies to onboard and X-Fi alike, as the mixing really doesn't change significantly.

I scrubbed up a pretty basic diagram here to illustrate. Blue is "home theater", while purple is optimal for PC gaming:

What's great about the radial convention is that it doesn't cripple Dolby Digital and DTS imaging. The optimal surround speakers for a Dolby Digital/DTS home theater are dipole, as they produce a more diffuse sound stage. The inverse is true for PC games -- directionality and localization is key, but I'd imagine dipoles would work very well for PC gaming as well. Depends on your tastes, really.

We could get into pissing contests about speaker placement, but it's my opinion that correct placement is crucial for surround gaming. If you can't make it happen, I think it's better to not bother.

And to the OP, I suggest stands for your rears, unless you're married, in which case your options'll be severely restricted. But get good God damn stands!

 

[Newbify2]

Technicalities aside, why not test each of your theories by playing a game/movie and finding out what works best for your speakers/ears/drivers/receivers/soundcards/earwax. I don't think anyone should follow a spec when they can clearly hear sounds coming from somewhere they shouldn't be coming from.

I like the lever under my car seat that lets me pull the seat back because I have long legs.

 

[phide]

I don't think anyone should follow a spec when they can clearly hear sounds coming from somewhere they shouldn't be coming from.

This is precisely what doesn't happen when you follow the specs. It's just that easy.

 

[alg7_munif]

For THX certification for a mixing environment, speaker placement is extremely significant, and their specs outline theater-like placement (slight-rear sides). This depends on the application, however.

Dolby has actually changed position a bit on speaker placement in recent years (five years, maybe). Note in the DD diagrams that the radial convention is not followed:


Creative documentation calls for radial, behind-the-listener placement because this is how game audio is mixed. Audio events cued directly behind the listener are designed to be reproduced behind the listener, not to the slight-behind sides. Placing rears to the side, in this case, severely cripples imaging. This isn't card specific, either. The same convention applies to onboard and X-Fi alike, as the mixing really doesn't change significantly.

I scrubbed up a pretty basic diagram here to illustrate. Blue is "home theater", while purple is optimal for PC gaming:


What's great about the radial convention is that it doesn't cripple Dolby Digital and DTS imaging. The optimal surround speakers for a Dolby Digital/DTS home theater are dipole, as they produce a more diffuse sound stage. The inverse is true for PC games -- directionality and localization is key, but I'd imagine dipoles would work very well for PC gaming as well. Depends on your tastes, really.

We could get into pissing contests about speaker placement, but it's my opinion that correct placement is crucial for surround gaming. If you can't make it happen, I think it's better to not bother.

And to the OP, I suggest stands for your rears, unless you're married, in which case your options'll be severely restricted. But get good God damn stands!

You should prove your statement that says the game audio is mixed according to Creative's placement. Some games like GRAW have DD Live card listed in the requirements to benefit from DD so I think that the game is "mixed" according to Dolby. Consoles also use DD so I think that multiplatform games are also "mixed" according to Dolby. I can't prove that the games are "mixed" according to Dolby or Creative but I think that the developers are not stupid enough to use Creative's placement for console's games that use DD.

 

[HSE]

You should prove your statement that says the game audio is mixed according to Creative's placement. Some games like GRAW have DD Live card listed in the requirements to benefit from DD so I think that the game is "mixed" according to Dolby. Consoles also use DD so I think that multiplatform games are also "mixed" according to Dolby. I can't prove that the games are "mixed" according to Dolby or Creative but I think that the developers are not stupid enough to use Creative's placement for console's games that use DD

As long as a game uses an audio API that mixes the sound in a XYZ coordinate system instead of discrete channel assignment a radial, behind-the-listener speaker placement is going to create better imaging, especially if multispeaker HRTF are being used.
Newsflash for you, DD Live is not an API and DS3D & OpenAL use an XYZ. Of course, you don't have to believe me, open your favorite IDE and create a quick DS3D/OpenAL sample app playing a sound source exactly behind you.

And finally, in a 'normal' computer environment speakers are between 1~2m/3~6ft, the angle difference among the "optimal, Dolby sanctioned" position and the recommended CL position in the THX console is merely 10~15°. At that distances, moving the speakers a few cm/in gets them positioned "optimally". Unless the speaker drivers are 2in, the differences between both recommended positions won't ruin the experience.

 

[alg7_munif]

Thanks for the newsflash but can you explain something? Do consoles use an API that doesn't mix in a XYZ coordinate system? As far as I know there are only a few computer speakers that accept a DD input but there are a lot of HT receivers that can be used with consoles. Newsflash for you too, I haven't found any console that uses a multichannel analogue output for computer speaker yet, most of them use DD output that is normally meant for HT receiver. If you said that Creative's position is better for games because they use an API with XYZ coordinate system, this means that you need to reposition your HT speakers when playing games on consoles to get the better imaging right? In a HT setup, the difference between the recommended CL position and the "optimal, Dolby sanctioned" position is normally more than a few cm/in. Another difference between a Dolby position and CL position is the surround speakers are facing more towards each other with Dolby position but they are facing more towards the front speakers with CL position.

 

[Audioguy]

The only time I have ever seen Dolby recomend BEHIND the listener driver placement is with the older Dolby Prologic systems. I think it might just be a case of people exaggerating the angles and placements. We know these Optimal placments are best case scenarios, but does moving the speakers behind the listener when they are supposed to be beside him actually ruin the imaging? I guess only the user can answer that for themselves. I couldn't care less what Creative Labs has to say about it really, they had nothing to do with developing any of these audio technologies. I have a Dolby Digital Card and a 5.1 speaker system. I think I will leave my speaker set up according to Dolby Labs and the Dolby Digital specification. Maybe you have to modify placement after this card processes the audio, who knows?
Might be good to run some tests when I get bored.

 

[Donnie27]

Man, you believe everything a company tells you? How many diagrams can you find that show you the correct way to setup 5.1?
Set up your speakers how ever you like. What I am saying is for audio I am more likley to trust the Audio engineers at Dolby Labs then some guy at Creative. Could it be perhaps the diagram is a bit off? Optimal placement is and will always be the same. If you want to jam a set of speakers behind you because you are misinterpreting a diagram, when every other diagram shows you the proper way ot do it go ahead. I understand why you watch movies upstairs, your audio is messed up in movies on the PC. Enjoy your movie's

[RANT]
First of all, find the Creative Labs THX Console set up to 5.1? Since CL is creating the source of the sound, its settings should matter LOL!

I do trust the folks a Dolby and when I use Dolby equipment I RTFM and set it up accordingly. I still have an old JVC Pro-Logic that I set up according to plan. I'm a 50 year fart who once owned a Merantz Quadraphonic receiver that also asked for the speakers BEHIND the listener. Anyone who knows anything about it will tell you the same.

Not that company you seemingly love to bash I first tested my speakers set up like that according to speaker placement provided by Aureal's A3D via 4.1 for "Wavetracing" to work properly. It was so advanced that it's 4.1 provided 16+ interpolation points between the speakers. Almost like Hyperthreading. The 4 real speakers created 12 to 23 more Phantom Speakers evenly spaced in a 360 degree pattern. A3D is the one who created my passion for 3D sound NOT Creative Labs BTW. So if I'm a Ttr0ll and F@nb0y, it's A3D's fault.

In those days, the best Creative Labs could do is 8 points and even then it was not as Defined/refined, Advanced or as Powerful as A3D's. Incoming used it similar to how BF2 and OpenAL works today, if not better.

I say again, I signed the petition too and got my 25% discount when Creative lied about 24bit on the Audigy one. Crystalizer also known as Crystal-lier doesn't work well for me.
I like the XMeridian and even the b-Enspirer better for music Playback. I still have a SQ2500 as a Keep sake, couple of Voodoo video cards as well



It's the Gold Card in the upper left corner.

What is EAX you ask? Here's what 85% of it is.

http://www.overclockers.com.au/techstuff/r_aurealv2500/

How does Aureal make the sound so immersive you ask? It uses a technology called Hardware Wavetracing, which calculates how much sound each surface reflects or absorbs, based upon the material it is supposedly made of. This means that sounds in the open are different to those in a closed room. Once again in Half-Life, I never tired of throwing grenades into rooms and going around the corner, to hear the echo as it bounced off each wall, then the muffled explosion. However, some people say that this kind of technology can be a DISADVANTAGE in FPS'ers such as Quake3 (which supports A3D 2.0, btw), because you can miss the audio cues of what your opponent is doing if, for example, there's a brick wall between you and them.

IMHO, Creative Labs still hasn't caught up with SQ-3500 but is still trying, the others don't even bother.

Even a 3rd party patch ROCKED for Quake 2 &3 and even with UT#1. This was with the speakers BEHIND the listener So NO, it's not just believing Creative Labs but understanding the technology that got us to where we are.[/RANT]

 

[Donnie27]

You should prove your statement that says the game audio is mixed according to Creative's placement. Some games like GRAW have DD Live card listed in the requirements to benefit from DD so I think that the game is "mixed" according to Dolby. Consoles also use DD so I think that multiplatform games are also "mixed" according to Dolby. I can't prove that the games are "mixed" according to Dolby or Creative but I think that the developers are not stupid enough to use Creative's placement for console's games that use DD.

Not when you select EAX in the Game's Audio control Panel. Then the Game assumes you're using a Creative Card that suports EAX and acts accordingly.

 

[alg7_munif]

Lol this is not a thread about comparing two cards but it's a thread on how to place a 5.1 speaker "correctly". The OP can't place the surround speakers behind him but he can place them at his side, a placement that is recommended by Dolby.

 

[Donnie27]

This is precisely what doesn't happen when you follow the specs. It's just that easy.

Yup, that seems hard for some!

 

[Audioguy]

I though we were talking about speaker placment? - Good man get off the coffee.
So your saying that when you enable EAX it messes up the imaging and you need to move your speakers to compensate?

 

[Donnie27]

Lol this is not a thread about comparing two cards but it's a thread on how to place a 5.1 speaker "correctly".

Not about comparing cards LOL! A3D called for the same REAR SPEAKER placement while your talking about placing the speakers to the side.

 

[Audioguy]

A3D is dead and buried , We are talking about modern Dolby Digital systems.

 

[Donnie27]

I though we were talking about speaker placment? - Good man get off the coffee.
So your saying that when you enable EAX it messes up the imaging and you need to move your speakers to compensate?

No, Oh brother, since all the way back to when sound first started being calculated on an XYZ bases, the speaker placement has been to the rear. Started by A3D. If you understand why speakers are placed to the rear for Games and how sound can be adjusted or can compensate for placement.

 

[Donnie27]

A3D is dead and buried , We are talking about modern Dolby Digital systems.

Those who fail to understand and forget the pass are doomed to fail in the future. You're perfect proof! I don't mean that in a negative way either.

 

[Audioguy]

Well if you want to follow A3D's way of doing things, They did NOT invent the technology. You need to go back a little further for that. I guess some Defunct company and some other gaming company will make your throw everything out the window that Dolby specifies for it's systems. Which is what your using correct? I think Dolby would know more about multichannel audio then these two companies put together....

Those who continually look backwards, blindly miss what is right in front of them. Your perfect proof of that! -I don't mean that in a negative way either.

I guess if you would take A3D's ideas over Dolby's then your probably alot worse of then we thought. Enjoy your system if that is even possible.

 

[alg7_munif]

It is not about companies but it is about contents that are available nowadays, most movies are encoded in DD, some PC games specify DD Live in their specs and all new consoles use DD for surround sound from games(I guess that this applies to multiplatform games as well) so I think that placing the surround speakers to the side is a better choice than placing them at the back especially when the OP said that he can't place them behind him anyway.

 

[Audioguy]

True, Optimal placment is a guideline of the proper setup procedures. Typically you cannot set them up perfectly according to this diagram. That being said, they are vey specific about rear channels. To each their own I guess. Some people can get used to messed up imaging. When I was gonna purchase my Dolby system for my PC, I read all the material I could find about the technology from Dolby. I figured they are the authority on the system, seeing how they designed the spec. How can some soundcard claim Dolby Digital output and then mess up the speaker placement on purpose? Or worse you have guys adding in their own antiquated ideas from a company that has long since been buried. You only get a bunch of mess up system that do not do what they are designed to do. Perhaps this is why they set up the standard and the diagrams in the first place, to show the proper way of setting the system up. If you want to mess up your system go ahead...
I think I will stick with Dolby Labs ideas myself.

 

[phide]

You should prove your statement that says the game audio is mixed according to Creative's placement.

Again, this is not "Creative" placement. I mentioned that the same convention applies to all sound chips, because mixing fundamentally happens at the API level.

HSE's correct regarding the X, Y, Z (Cartesian) coordinate system, with listener source(s) and event sources. In OpenAL, the listener position is configurable, or can be defined to be affixed to the PPOV. HRTF can also be defined in OpenAL, but HRTF happens outside of OpenAL. The source events have no boundaries (that I'm aware of), so they can be defined in any position. Positionally, events can and do occur directly behind the listener. Ditto for DS, more or less.

Obviously, events that occur behind the listener can't be properly defined by side speakers. An event that occurs nine feet behind the listener will still end up being played back at both sides of your listening position. The fix? Rear placement. In this scenario, you can render both side and rear events faithfully. Because the speaker arrangement is radial, direct-to-side sources can be split between equally (minus 3dB, naturally) LF/LR or RF/RR.

I've never encountered a game that doesn't mix in this manner (based upon my own experiences with my old 5.1 system). I assume that "Dolby Digital" games don't follow Dolby specifications either, though I may be wrong.

My previous diagram was a tad simplistic. Here's a better one:

Pretty difficult to pull this one off, but it's the optimal configuration for surround gaming. My preference is for 6.1 or 7.1, but this works. Both fill in obvious gaps in 5.1.

Unless the speaker drivers are 2in, the differences between both recommended positions won't ruin the experience.

You're right, but I think it's important to stress proper positioning all the same. Placing rears to the side isn't the end of the world, certainly, but if correct placement is achievable, there's no reason not to position speakers properly.

The OP can't place the surround speakers behind him but he can place them at his side, a placement that is recommended by Dolby.

That's the Dolby recommendation. Dolby Digital and DirectSound/OpenAL are wholly different, as has been explained.

 

[alg7_munif]

I think that you haven't mentioned anything about consoles yet. Do we need to move the speaker to the back to play games on consoles to get the sounds from events that occur directly behind the listener or consoles use a different kind of API that doesn't use the Cartesian coordinate system?(they might use the polar coordinate system instead lol)

 

[phide]

It's a good question. My assumption is that it's actually better to not follow the Dolby recommendation for console games as well, but this may depend on the console. With the 360, we know that the APIs are basically the same as they are on the PC. For the PS3? Couldn't tell you.

I should say that I don't particularly like the Dolby recommendation for home theater either. The recommendation is adapted from cinema specifications due to the fact that most any theater doesn't use any real rear surrounds, except for SDDS, which uses a "box" model, with two left/right rears in the corner of the theater (fairly sure these are inactive for DD/DTS). Ideally, we'd be better off with a radial system, but film mixers don't mix for that -- thusly, follow the Dolby recommendation for home theater (for now).

I'm checking out the handfuls of Dolby pro documentation now. They might actually recommend differently for games than for theater/home theater. I'll let you guys know.

EDIT: I kind of prefer the ITU-R recommendation over Dolby's own:

Though, again, not ideal for gaming -- but close.