Jump to content
  • joelha
    joelha

    Atmos? We Don’t Need No Stinking Atmos

     

     

        

        Audio: Listen to this article.

     

     

     

    Atmos? We don’t need no stinking Atmos.


    From the beginning, I told Chris Connaker that writing about a 12-channel Atmos system would appeal to very few audiophiles. It’s hard enough to afford a highly satisfying two-channel system let alone one that requires additional amplifiers, speakers, dacs, and cables. And how many of us have a room (or the incredibly tolerant wife) to accommodate such a system?


    Full disclosure: I have never heard a 12- or 16-channel Atmos system. Chris has invited me to his home to listen and, so far, I haven’t taken him up on his very kind offer. I’m sure that’s my loss.


    For those who contend that Atmos is not true-to-the-source, I have to ask, “What is the source?” The flat master, the CD, vinyl, or one of multiple streaming versions? What about first pressings, subsequent pressings, remastered or even upsampled versions? Which of those options is TTTS? The truth is, we don’t care about being true to the source nearly as much as we care to hear the sound we like.


    If that weren’t true, there wouldn’t be highly regarded tube amplifiers which introduce several percentage points of distortion into the audio chain. I’ve already mentioned upsampling which, depending on the software and settings used, can create a variety of sonic results. And what about the variety of speakers employing various technologies (horn, ribbon, electrostatic, dynamic cone, etc.) each with different sonic characters and their own following?


    Are there bad Atmos recordings? Absolutely and I have some. I also have my share of bad stereo recordings. Atmos is not the issue nearly as much as the care and artistry used in mastering and mixing the final recorded product.


    So, if I haven’t heard a full-fledged Atmos system, why am I writing about Atmos?


    Because Chris opened my eyes to a very compelling Atmos option which is almost never discussed: Two-channel Atmos. Now you’re probably thinking, “Two-channel Atmos? That makes as much sense as a two-dimensional hologram. What could be the benefit of two-channel Atmos?”


    The answer is, most 2-channel Atmos recordings I’ve heard are more analog sounding and have a more appealing soundstage than their traditional stereo counterparts. Against my favorite non-Atmos albums, I keep gravitating to my 2-channel Atmos albums. 


    Why would this be? For one, Atmos is, by design, to be played not only in 12 or even 16-channel versions but in 2-channels. The two-channel product is not an “edited” version of the traditional Atmos album (as when a multi-channel file is downmixed to two channels by JRiver or similar programs) but pre-determined to meet Atmos standards. The process of creating an Atmos album is detailed here: link.

     

    Second, while Atmos files can be compressed, Apple is enforcing a set of audio quality standards, including requiring the use of uncompressed files, which Tidal and Amazon are likely to uphold. Where among these standards come the improved sound I’m hearing, I don’t know.


    What are the downsides of two-channel Atmos?


    There are several.


    First, while there are sites which host Atmos files, the albums are often priced above that of the average album download and the selection is limited.


    Second, you can find additional albums on Bluray discs but you have to carefully search for the Atmos versions, some being part of a deluxe box set which can be quite expensive. Depending on your requirements, the discs might require ripping. And here again, the selection is very limited.


    Then there’s the required Dolby decoding software which costs $400.


    If your eyes haven’t yet dimmed on the prospect of acquiring two-channel Atmos albums, even the downloaded files require conversion.


    As with so many aspects of this wonderful hobby, getting the very best sound is often expensive and time consuming. But I love the journey. When I was a teen, the only way to improve my system was to buy another component. Today, we have so many more options to explore, many of them delivering almost instant gratification such as a new software program or even an adjusted software setting. I’m placing Atmos in that category.


    Finally, you might be thinking, “Sure, I’ll just spend $400 on the Dolby decoder, purchase an Atmos album, and learn how to create a 2-channel album all so I can decide whether I like 2-channel Atmos. Nope. Not necessary. Here’s a one-minute clip of the first track of a truly outstanding album (A Shade of Blue by the Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio) (download link, please unzip). It’s a 24/48 file in flac uncompressed format. Please download the sample as soon as you can as I’m not sure how long it will be available. 


    I chose this album for a number of reasons. First, the recording is excellent. Second, as it’s on both Qobuz and Tidal, subscribers will have an opportunity to compare the downloaded file to the streaming versions. Finally, if you like jazz, it doesn’t get much better than this. You will notice the bass is enhanced on the Atmos version. I believe that’s a mastering or mixing choice rather an inherent feature of Atmos. As I’ve mentioned, the aspects to listen for are the way in which the instruments are separated and distinct and even more, the natural sound of the album.


    Please audition the uploaded sample and post your opinions, good, bad, or otherwise. I believe many who have criticized Atmos (as the title of this article not so subtly suggests) will change their opinion and will even find the time and expense of acquiring 2-channel Atmos albums to be well worth it.
     

     

     




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    48 minutes ago, austinpop said:

    This is purely speculation, but it almost seems each approach has pros and cons.

    • 2ch stereo mix
      • Pro: Created by a human by ear, not an algorithm
      • Con: no required audio quality standards. They are self-imposed, by the engineer and/or the label
    • Atmos 2.0 
      • Pro: Conformance to audio quality standards required
      • Con: 2.0 mix is rendered by an algorithm: the Atmos renderer for the 2.0 speaker setup.

    Thanks for taking the time to write your detailed impressions, austinpop.

     

    However, this is the danger of using only one sample to assess an entire format.

     

    It would be like assessing DSD vs. PCM based on only one track.

     

    If I didn't upload a sample track, people would just read about one man's impressions of Atmos 2.0.

     

    Not very satisfying.

     

    And by uploading not even one track but one minute of one track, the opportunity to assess an entire format is very limited.

     

    Your assessments may be spot on however, as with any other format, they'd be far more informed by hearing many more examples of Atmos 2.0.

     

    Not hearing those additional examples is not your fault of course. 

     

    I hope you'll get to hear more Atmos 2.0 music.

     

    At the very least, one of the points of my article was to explain that enjoying Atmos does not require the major hardware investment that I assumed it did.

     

    As for the sound, it could very well be a matter of personal preference but I'm hooked.

     

    Thanks again for your post.


    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Pardon me if this is a bit off-topic, but I just want to get the basic Atmos flow understood.

     

    Authoring (what's in the Atmos mix)

    • "Bed" channels: 7.1.4 discrete channels that form the foundation. Perhaps other bed configurations are allowed?
    • "Objects": up to 128 — (7+1+4) = 116. These are encoded as metadata that define the spatial locations of said objects

    Rendering

    • This is computation (done in the Dolby Refernce Player) that starts with the Atmos mix above, looks at the specified output speaker layout, and then renders the 128 (beds + objects) to that layout.

    Is that, in a nutshell, what Atmos is about?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, austinpop said:

    Pardon me if this is a bit off-topic, but I just want to get the basic Atmos flow understood.

     

    Authoring (what's in the Atmos mix)

    • "Bed" channels: 7.1.4 discrete channels that form the foundation. Perhaps other bed configurations are allowed?
    • "Objects": up to 128 — (7+1+4) = 116. These are encoded as metadata that define the spatial locations of said objects

    Rendering

    • This is computation (done in the Dolby Refernce Player) that starts with the Atmos mix above, looks at the specified output speaker layout, and then renders the 128 (beds + objects) to that layout.

    Is that, in a nutshell, what Atmos is about?

    Yes and no. 
     

    It’s possible to use 7.1.2 bed channels and 128 objects, but there are no rules. Some really good engineers use objects for everything except LFE, essentially no bed. Again, no rules. 
     

    Rendering, is pretty much as you say. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    Yes and no. 
     

    It’s possible to use 7.1.2 bed channels and 128 objects, but there are no rules. Some really good engineers use objects for everything except LFE, essentially no bed. Again, no rules. 
     

    Rendering, is pretty much as you say. 

     

    Oh that's interesting. I thought the actual audio data was all in the beds, and the objects were pure metadata. If there is an "all object, no bed" mode, then I clearly need to understand this more. But this is OT. I'll take it offline with you, Chris.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    Would love to hear that.  

    Here is a link to Qobuz (Belgium) where you can find a highrez version of this album, which should be similar (not equal) to the SACd version.

    The extra 6th track 06 - Flamenco Sketches (alternate take) however is not on this version.

    Please note that this is a remix, and that track durations are different.

    e.g. 

    Track 1 on SACD 9:22 , on Qobuz: 9:07

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Atmos music never going to be big just as surround music never made it. I went to huge expense and had a 5 channel dedicated music system back when J Gordon holt was recording music in 5 channel and had a similar system. I have the SACD Miles Davis 3 channel, Pink Floyd 4 channel Dark Side mix and Kraftwerk. All sounded amazing and easily beat stereo. Alas circuit board on preamp died and I reverted to stereo in the absence of new surround recordings. The cost of the associated equipment will keep Atmos to a small high end percentage as did surround music. I'm afraid home theatre is about where it will largely stay and this is what it has largely been designed for. A blow you off the seat movie sound. Which lately is overwhelming movie stories.  

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 hours ago, robocop said:

    Atmos music never going to be big just as surround music never made it.


    ATMOS will remain in the streaming platform where the users are listening with headphones or earbuds. ATMOS binaural is especially tailored for it and it can sound really good compared to plain stereo. 
     

    I also agree with you that multichannel music for audiophiles is not going to replace the stereo anytime soon. I still have the multi channel SACD player and like you said so few materials that I care to listen available. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 hours ago, robocop said:

    Atmos music never going to be big just as surround music never made it

    You are aware that a single Atmos file plays on systems from two channels through sixteen channels right? 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My biggest fear/objection about Atmos, is that it is Apple only.

    Other players - software, hardware, streaming services - most probably will be restricted completely, or will have to pay lots of money to have access to Atmos content.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It is not Apple only. They have more Atmos then say Tidal, but it in not Apple only. The folks at Dolby are pushing for more downloads well as physical media.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Apollo said:

    My biggest fear/objection about Atmos, is that it is Apple only.

    Other players - software, hardware, streaming services - most probably will be restricted completely, or will have to pay lots of money to have access to Atmos content.

     

    Currently for streaming it's Apple Music, Amazon Music, and Tidal who have Atmos. For downloads it's sites like 2L, TRPTK, and Immersive Audio Album. For Blu-ray it's everyone. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It's surprising to read comments predicting the demise of Atmos or its relegation solely to home theaters.

     

    It seems as if some are suggesting that if a technology won't be widely accepted, it won't be worth our time.

     

    We're in a nitch hobby.

     

    Does the average household have separate amplifiers, preamplifiers, dacs, streamers, etc.?

     

    Yet, many of us do.

     

    SACD's were never a universally accepted format and yet many of us still play and even rip them.

     

    The question is not whether a format will become popular with the masses but whether we can enjoy it.

     

    Ours is not a philosophizing hobby, it's an audio hobby.

     

    Listen and make your decision.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 1/4/2024 at 9:55 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

    Would love to hear that.  

    See my PM in email to you. JCR 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think that this is on topic??  I have done some interesting testing.  I play Apple ATMOS from my Mac Mini to a Schiit Syn 2-channel DAC and then use the analog extraction to present a 5.1 output.  There is a lot of ambient info in that data.  Now, taking the same stream and feeding it to the system rendered in 7.1.4 is a very, very interesting experience.  Note that the power amp and speakers are the same.

     

    I am finding that many of the ATMOS masters I am listing have superior mastering.

     

    Someone up the list mentioned the website Magic Vinyl Digital.  So I took a look at the new Peter Gabriel album in this context:

     

    https://magicvinyldigital.net/2023/12/17/peter-gabriel-i-o-review-test-cd-bright-and-dark-mix-tidal-max-flac-24-96-bright-and-dark-mix-amazon-dolby-atmos-and-blu-ray-bright-mix-dark-mix-and-in-side-mix-dolby-atmos-truehd/#Part5

     

    Just the DR numbers are amazing on the ATMOS mixes.    Yes I need ATMOS

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

     

    https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-office/home-entertainment/sonos-era-300-review/

    Quote

    For example, two Sonos Era 300 speakers can be paired together and used with a Sonos Arc or second-generation Beam soundbar for the ultimate 7.1.4 Dolby Atmos entertainment experience -- no overhead speakers needed. In fact, even if you invest in just one Era 300 speaker, I've found its audio performance more than reliable for all genres of content.

     

    https://forums.steinberg.net/t/why-is-atmos-routing-so-complicated/853273/2

    Quote

    The whole point of Atmos is become independent of specific speaker positions and allow you to make a mix that works from anything like a 32 channels theater to a a mono speaker without having to make separate mixes (in theory, practice is not necessarily quite there yet).

    So all positions are described in a 3D space as X/Y/Z coordinates and then mapped to whatever speakers are in the room when someone listens to this mix. Because of all of this 3D mapping there are no master or aux buses anymore, because it all gets packaged up in one very large file as independent audio streams with metadata. And then the actual mixing happens during playback, not when you render the file.

     

    https://musictech.com/guides/essential-guide/beyond-stereo-dolby-atmos-and-the-race-for-space/

    Quote

    Of course, the technology for multi-speaker panning and mixing has existed for many decades; what Atmos does is simplify and standardise the process. A song mixed and rendered using the format will automatically adapt to whatever playback setup you’re using – a single mono Bluetooth speaker, a car stereo, a pair of headphones, or all the way up to extended home entertainment systems featuring any number of speakers.


    Hence it's much closer to an "adaptive" format as mentioned above, IMHO there's no such thing as 2ch Atmos since the final number of decoded channel(s) in PCM format is decided by either the hardware or software (i.e. Dolby Reference Player) decoder.

     

    The only difference among various "flavors" of Atmos should be determined by each specific CODEC, obviously TrueHD should be our best bet since it's a lossless CODEC that could be found on Blu-ray discs or downloaded online.

     

    Other than that, we've got the lossy ones (AC-4 and EC-3) that are available for streaming purposes

     

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AppleMusic/comments/13nm9y6/comment/jl38f1x/

    Quote

    Amazon Music decodes AC4-IMS on its own and sends the decoded Atmos audio to the device. This means that you can enjoy Dolby Atmos even on Android devices that do not support Dolby Atmos technology, as it does not rely on hardware decoders.

     

    https://www.avid.com/resource-center/encoding-and-delivering-dolby-atmos-music

    Quote

    AC-4 is the codec that is used to deliver your Dolby Atmos music to Android devices over streaming platforms. AC-4 can also carry the binaural metadata that we create during a Dolby Atmos Music mix. This means that when your mix is played over headphones, the binaural properties set during the mix process will be heard by the listener.

     

    Quote

    On an Apple TV 4K the audio is transmitted over HDMI for an Atmos-enabled soundbar or AV receiver. However, EC-3 is also used for headphone delivery on the Apple iPhone, even though it is a format that is designed for speaker delivery. An iPhone doesn’t use the Dolby Atmos Binaural settings that are baked into the ADM file that we created. Instead, it creates a binaural version of the mix by first downmixing the Dolby Atmos file into a 7.1.4 mix and then virtualizing that 7.1.4 mix into a binaural mix. In fact, this processing is done in the AirPods themselves.

     

    Of course Dolby Reference Player with Dolby AC-4 could also decode AC4-IMS just fine

     

    https://github.com/google/ExoPlayer/tree/release-v2/testdata/src/test/assets/media/ts

    GBdW4is.png

     


     

    2023 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2023-surround-releases.33410/

     

    2022 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2022-surround-releases.31649/

     

    2021 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2021-surround-releases.29669/

     

    2020 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2020-surround-releases.27537/

     

    2019 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2019-surround-releases.25817/

     

    2018 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2018-surround-releases.24661/

     

    2017 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2017-surround-releases.24645/

     

    2016 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2016-surround-releases.24637/

     

    Basically Atmos turned out to be available on Blu-ray as early as October 2016, while the very first free download actually appeared back in November 2017.

     

    Right now Atmos downloads could even be found on Bandcamp for as little as 7 bucks per album, no kidding.

     


     

    qBmlbeR.jpg

    l0wQaQG.png

     

    Finally let's go back to the link I quoted above, most likely that should have explained what's going on behind the scenes

     

    https://musictech.com/guides/essential-guide/beyond-stereo-dolby-atmos-and-the-race-for-space/

    Quote

    Mixing for Atmos is fundamentally different from mixing for stereo, and not just in terms of panning. Perhaps the biggest lasting impact that Atmos may have for mixing is how engineers treat loudness and EQ. It’s no secret that the dynamic range of popular music has become smaller and smaller during the ‘loudness war’ of the past few decades. Interestingly, it might be Atmos that provides a much-needed reset to the brick-like compression and limiting of modern popular music.

    “It is going to go back to a more dynamic listening experience,” says Lewis. “And though it might take the listeners a little time to recondition, that has to be a good thing. For me, it is about dynamics, width, and space. It’s about opening the music up and letting people inside. The downside is that we will probably have to work a bit harder, because some of the free gifts you get from a mix bus aren’t going to be there anymore. So, figuring out how we are going to ‘glue’ a mix together is going to take a period of experimentation.”

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 minutes ago, seeteeyou said:

     

    https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-office/home-entertainment/sonos-era-300-review/

     

    https://forums.steinberg.net/t/why-is-atmos-routing-so-complicated/853273/2

     

    https://musictech.com/guides/essential-guide/beyond-stereo-dolby-atmos-and-the-race-for-space/


    Hence it's much closer to an "adaptive" format as mentioned above, IMHO there's no such thing as 2ch Atmos since the final number of decoded channel(s) in PCM format is decided by either the hardware or software (i.e. Dolby Reference Player) decoder.

     

    The only difference among various "flavors" of Atmos should be determined by each specific CODEC, obviously TrueHD should be our best bet since it's a lossless CODEC that could be found on Blu-ray discs or downloaded online.

     

    Other than that, we've got the lossy ones (AC-4 and EC-3) that are available for streaming purposes

     

    https://www.reddit.com/r/AppleMusic/comments/13nm9y6/comment/jl38f1x/

     

    https://www.avid.com/resource-center/encoding-and-delivering-dolby-atmos-music

     

     

    Of course Dolby Reference Player with Dolby AC-4 could also decode AC4-IMS just fine

     

    https://github.com/google/ExoPlayer/tree/release-v2/testdata/src/test/assets/media/ts

    GBdW4is.png

     


     

    2023 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2023-surround-releases.33410/

     

    2022 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2022-surround-releases.31649/

     

    2021 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2021-surround-releases.29669/

     

    2020 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2020-surround-releases.27537/

     

    2019 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2019-surround-releases.25817/

     

    2018 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2018-surround-releases.24661/

     

    2017 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2017-surround-releases.24645/

     

    2016 SURROUND RELEASES

    https://www.quadraphonicquad.com/forums/threads/2016-surround-releases.24637/

     

    Basically Atmos turned out to be available on Blu-ray as early as October 2016, while the very first free download actually appeared back in November 2017.

     

    Right now Atmos downloads could even be found on Bandcamp for as little as 7 bucks per album, no kidding.

     


     

    qBmlbeR.jpg

    l0wQaQG.png

     

    Finally let's go back to the link I quoted above, most likely that should have explained what's going on behind the scenes

     

    https://musictech.com/guides/essential-guide/beyond-stereo-dolby-atmos-and-the-race-for-space/


    Can you summarize what you’re trying to say? I see a lot of links that repeat what others have said in this thread or that are off topic, but I likely just don’t understand what you’re trying to say. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I tried the 2 minute Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio sample and compared to the non-ATMOS version that is available on Apple Music.

     

    My observations are very similar to those posted by others. Overall, I prefer the 2 minute 2 channel ATMOS version, to me it had a degree of extra realism and versus the Apple Music version is one step further away from reproduced music towards the real thing. Also, I too found that the ATMOS version had more bass.

     

    This ties in with some other experimentation that I have done this weekend with 2 channel ATMOS. I can play an ATMOS track using Apple Music on my iPhone or iPad and play this through my system via AirPlay. With options to use the AirPlay direct on my Devialet amp, or an AirPlay receiver on my PC to HQPlayer, then stream with NAA, or AirPlay to my Denon AVR.

     

    As an alternative to the AirPlay route, I can use Apple Music on my Apple TV, HDMI to my Denon AVR, then line out analogue to the Devialet amp. With the Denon set to stereo, this effectively gives me a 2-channel downmix. 

     

    What is interesting is that the results are quite different. The key difference is between using Apple TV / HDMI and any of the AirPlay options, and the key difference sonically is bass. Basically, there is a lot more bass, and deeper bass, via Apple TV / HDMI.

     

    I suspect that this is because when using Apple TV  HDMI to the Denon AVR the LFE channel is included, but when using iPhone / iPad AirPlay it is not.

     

    I get similar results if I simply use Apple Music on my PC, this too lacks the last depths of bass with an ATMOS encoded album.

     

    This is all a little frustrating, as it seems to be impossible to establish exactly what Apple is doing with ATMOS across various devices and platforms. In addition, us humble Apple Music subscribers have no information and zero control over any of this, certainly when using devices such as iPads, iPhones, or Apple TV.

     

    What I can say is that subjectively Apple TV HDMI to my Denon sounds the best. I suspect that this is the only route I have tried that is downmixing all channels, including LFE.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Another thought regarding the above observations.

     

    Is there any way that you could connect an Apple TV via HDMI to input to a PC?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    18 minutes ago, Confused said:

    I tried the 2 minute Tsuyoshi Yamamoto Trio sample and compared to the non-ATMOS version that is available on Apple Music.

     

    My observations are very similar to those posted by others. Overall, I prefer the 2 minute 2 channel ATMOS version, to me it had a degree of extra realism and versus the Apple Music version is one step further away from reproduced music towards the real thing. Also, I too found that the ATMOS version had more bass.

     

    This ties in with some other experimentation that I have done this weekend with 2 channel ATMOS. I can play an ATMOS track using Apple Music on my iPhone or iPad and play this through my system via AirPlay. With options to use the AirPlay direct on my Devialet amp, or an AirPlay receiver on my PC to HQPlayer, then stream with NAA, or AirPlay to my Denon AVR.

     

    As an alternative to the AirPlay route, I can use Apple Music on my Apple TV, HDMI to my Denon AVR, then line out analogue to the Devialet amp. With the Denon set to stereo, this effectively gives me a 2-channel downmix. 

     

    What is interesting is that the results are quite different. The key difference is between using Apple TV / HDMI and any of the AirPlay options, and the key difference sonically is bass. Basically, there is a lot more bass, and deeper bass, via Apple TV / HDMI.

     

    I suspect that this is because when using Apple TV  HDMI to the Denon AVR the LFE channel is included, but when using iPhone / iPad AirPlay it is not.

     

    I get similar results if I simply use Apple Music on my PC, this too lacks the last depths of bass with an ATMOS encoded album.

     

    This is all a little frustrating, as it seems to be impossible to establish exactly what Apple is doing with ATMOS across various devices and platforms. In addition, us humble Apple Music subscribers have no information and zero control over any of this, certainly when using devices such as iPads, iPhones, or Apple TV.

     

    What I can say is that subjectively Apple TV HDMI to my Denon sounds the best. I suspect that this is the only route I have tried that is downmixing all channels, including LFE.

    There’s a lot going on here :~)

     

    The odds your AirPlay method is using the Atmos album are very slim. Make sure your phone/tablet still say Atmos after music starts playing. 
     

    You may want to read this for some additional background on Atmos music - https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/immersive/music-ultimate-guide-to-high-end-immersive-audio-r1223/

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    The odds your AirPlay method is using the Atmos album are very slim. Make sure your phone/tablet still say Atmos after music starts playing. 

    Yes, good point. On an iPhone it still states "Dolby Atmos" next to the selected album but the "Dolby Atmos" designation under the play bar vanishes if AirPlay is selected. (this seems to be the the case for Bluetooth also) I am demonstrating my Apple Music Newbie status here, but you live and learn. 


    So in terms of the many devices that I have to hand, the only things that will actually work with Atmos are the Apple TV 4K, and my iPhone, assuming I only use the internal speakers. It is somewhat ironic that ATMOS will work on the iPhone's internal speakers (which are rubbish) and not via any other means. (other than Air / Ear Pods, which I do not have)

     

    Oh well, at least the Apply TV works as it should. I guess these things will get easier in the future.

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    38 minutes ago, Confused said:

    Yes, good point. On an iPhone it still states "Dolby Atmos" next to the selected album but the "Dolby Atmos" designation under the play bar vanishes if AirPlay is selected. (this seems to be the the case for Bluetooth also) I am demonstrating my Apple Music Newbie status here, but you live and learn. 


    So in terms of the many devices that I have to hand, the only things that will actually work with Atmos are the Apple TV 4K, and my iPhone, assuming I only use the internal speakers. It is somewhat ironic that ATMOS will work on the iPhone's internal speakers (which are rubbish) and not via any other means. (other than Air / Ear Pods, which I do not have)

     

    Oh well, at least the Apply TV works as it should. I guess these things will get easier in the future.

     


    AirPlay Atmos only works on a few devices using AirPlay 2. The good thing is that this helps explain the differences you heard because it wasn’t playing Atmos in your tests. 
     

    More ways to play it are coming and a few ways to make it high end / great sounding are also coming. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 1/2/2024 at 7:04 PM, PeterG said:

    Nevertheless, a terrific minute of music, and it sounds very good.  I don't think I would have mistaken it for analog had I not known, but I agree on the excellent soundstage, or maybe I should say on the excellent use of the stereo effect.  Similar to John Lee Hooker's Burnin' with the reverb.  REALLY good bass.  I am going to buy the CD or LP to compare.

     

    Following up--I bought the LP.  Unfortunately, for purposes of comparing Atmos to vinyl, the mix is so different on the LP, that using this to compare media would just be silly.  On the vinyl, the bass is much more subdued, and also way below the level of bass my system is capable of producing.  So I'm left thinking one of the engineers made a decision that really should have been left to the artist, and I do not understand why.  Interestingly, the record notes that the performance was recorded in "Stereo/5.1, immersive", so I guess I am doubly surprised by the difference.

     

    (For those who buy both vinyl and digital, I would recommend digital on this one.  The album sounds great overall, but it does not sound analog, and my fourth side had significant surface noise, I expect to exchange it)

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, PeterG said:

    For those who buy both vinyl and digital, I would recommend digital on this one.

    Thanks for your assessment, PeterG.

     

    I don't recall whether I mentioned this in a previous post but I also purchased the DSD version of this album and still prefer the Atmos 2.0 version.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now




×
×
  • Create New...