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



    3 minutes ago, Allan F said:

    Who needs two channel Atmos!?

    No one.

     

    We also don't "need" high-end audio systems.

     

    But we sure do enjoy them.

     

    The title was for fun. The article explains the points I want to make.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, Fritsveer said:

    Many thanks for the article and file to check. Did compare tonight with wive next to me. She also confirmed the airiness of the atmos version. Sounds how I perceive an atmos recording via my AirPods Pro 2 ( although of course , it’s a different quality)
    I want more of these 2.0 recordings ( have atmos able 5.1 set-up). I like the sound as well as the ability to use my higher end 2.0 system for these recordings. 

    Any chance more 2.0 atmos recordings can be expected? 
     

    Every Atmos mix can be played on a two channel system. If you are specificaly talking about TrueHD Atmos albums, I currently have over 200 of them. There are many more available, with many more to come. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @joelha Thanks for a great, thought-provoking article. I have downloaded your sample, and plan to compare it these 2 versions I found on Qobuz:

    Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?" For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct? Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

     

    I suspect I need education! @The Computer Audiophile can probably set me straight!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, austinpop said:

    @joelha Thanks for a great, thought-provoking article. I have downloaded your sample, and plan to compare it these 2 versions I found on Qobuz:

    Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?" For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct? Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

     

    I suspect I need education! @The Computer Audiophile can probably set me straight!

    You're very welcome, austinpop.

     

    And thanks for the comment.

     

    As for what exactly goes into the creation of a 2-channel Atmos version, I'm going to, as you suggest, let Chris set you straight.

     

    He's many times more knowledgeable about all things Atmos than I am.

     

    I'll only say that, in the case of "A Shade of Blue", I have both the Atmos and DSD versions and I definitely prefer the Atmos version.

     

    Joel

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    18 minutes ago, austinpop said:

    Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?"

    exactly

     

    I know this isn't right, but when I see ATMOS I think multiple channels, at least 5.1.2 and preferably more. That makes sense to me. Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

     

    I'm not a purist as I have 9.4.6 Trinnov system and enjoy what it does when I apply Auro3D to most 5.1 SACD and DVD-A mixes as well as some stereo mixes, but I think they would have been better off sticking with calling it spatial audio for 2 channels and leave Atmos for multichannel. 

     

    However, I'm with A'pop, , , , , willing to get educated

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, austinpop said:

    Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?"

     

    For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct?

     

    Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

     

     

     

    Hi @austinpop all logical questions.

     

     

    In the Atmos world, it's not really a downmix in the traditional sense, but rather a different rendering of the audio. In most Atmos mixes the engineer will make decisions that translate to some or all of the different rendering configurations. For example, the LFE channel isn't used much becuase this is thrown away in two channel mixes by the Atmos renderer. A traditional mix would use the LFE and downmix it into the front left and right often times. Another example, I was talking to an engineer making Atmos decisions about which objects to include in the mix that worked in all render configurations from two channel to sixteen. When listening back, it's easy to switch between the different renderings to make sure the music translates well. 

     

    The Atmos mix in all rendering configurations is likely a different mix from the traditional stereo mix. 

     

    The traditional two channel and the Atmos two channel cometimes can me very similar, but other times can be very different. It all depends on the mix. With the two channel Atmos, you still have the rendering process to place all the channels and objects. This is NOT as simple as a fold down or downmix, there is a lot of math involved and grouping of objects for the best quality or smallest file size etc... It's a totally different world from something like a 5.1/7.1 downmix to 2.0.

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    I know this isn't right, but when I see ATMOS I think multiple channels, at least 5.1.2 and preferably more. That makes sense to me. Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

     

    Most of us aren't right :~)

     

    The gimmick is traidional stereo. Squeezing everything into two speakers with limited tools for the past 60 years. Like drinking concentrate.

     

     

    4 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    I'm not a purist as I have 9.4.6 Trinnov system and enjoy what it does when I apply Auro3D to most 5.1 SACD and DVD-A mixes as well as some stereo mixes, but I think they would have been better off sticking with calling it spatial audio for 2 channels and leave Atmos for multichannel. 

     

    The beauty of Atmos is a sinlge name and single file for all configurations. No need to know anything, just play the music. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

    bbosler,

     

    As you say you're not a purist, I'm not sure how you could draw a conclusion without hearing the product first.

     

    I would no more have an opinion of your Trinnov system until I had heard it.

     

    How many developments would we miss in this hobby if we discounted what we were going to hear before we heard it?

     

    I hope you'll give the download a shot and let us know what you think.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    32 minutes ago, joelha said:

    As you say you're not a purist, I'm not sure how you could draw a conclusion without hearing the product first.

     

    fair enough

     

    Given I have thousands of recordings including mono, stereo, 4.0 , 5.0, 5.1, Auro3D and various versions of multichannel Atmos in TrueHD, I doubt I ever try 2 channel Atmos since I have reached my saturation point in trying new formats, and I can easily just listen to it in the multichannel version........ but your point is well taken

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

     

    You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

     

    https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

     

     

    Back to my COVID fog,...

     

    If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    12 minutes ago, bobfa said:

    I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

     

    You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

     

    https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

     

     

    Back to my COVID fog,...

     

    If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

     

     

    Get better soon Bob. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, bobfa said:

    I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

     

    You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

     

    https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

     

     

    Back to my COVID fog,...

     

    If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

     

     


    Get well soon! Bob.

     

    Back to the topic, I tried with AirPod Pro Gen 2, the remastered version have some enhancement to the highs. I prefer the original version and Not hearing much difference with ATMOS enabled or not that would immediately be noticed if enjoying music is the top priority. Am I missing something?

     

    5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    The traditional two channel and the Atmos two channel cometimes can me very similar, but other times can be very different.


    Can there be two channel ATMOS? Headphones and AirPods are exempted. I am not keeping up with ATMOS technology but it is always my understanding is that you need at least 4 speakers for the object audio to work.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 minutes ago, STC said:

    Can there be two channel ATMOS? Headphones and AirPods are exempted. I am not keeping up with ATMOS technology but it is always my understanding is that you need at least 4 speakers for the object audio to work.

    Yes, there is 2-channel Atmos. 

     

    That's why I've offered the one minute download in my post. 

     

    It is a 2-channel Atmos track and, assuming you have a Qobuz or Tidal subscription, will allow you to make a good comparison between it and a traditional stereo recording. 

     

    Please give it a try. 

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 minutes ago, joelha said:

    Yes, there is 2-channel Atmos. 

     

    That's why I've offered the one minute download in my post. 

     

    It is a 2-channel Atmos track and, assuming you have a Qobuz or Tidal subscription, will allow you to make a good comparison between it and a traditional stereo recording. 

     

    Please give it a try. 

     

    Joel


    Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 
     

    For Tidal “ You can stream music in Dolby Atmos on your Dolby Atmos compatible soundbars, TVs, AVRs, in addition to your iOS and Android compatible devices. For a full list of compatible devices, visit our support page.“

     

    and for Apple products “

    If you choose Automatic, here’s what you'll need

    Supported songs will play in Dolby Atmos automatically when you're listening using:

    Any Apple or Beats Bluetooth headphones

    If you’re using headphones that support Spatial Audio with dynamic head tracking, you’ll need to turn on Spatial Audio in Control Centre.

    The built-in speakers on an iPhone XS or later (except iPhone SE), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd generation or later), iPad Pro 11-inch or iPad Air (4th generation or later)”

     

    You cannot produce ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones or AirPods and that too only if they are ATMOS compatible.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, STC said:

    Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 

    You can tell me it's not possible or you can give the download a try.

     

    I've been happily listening to 2-channel Atmos on two non-Atmos speakers for weeks now.

     

    I wouldn't devoted the time to my article (nor would Chris have agreed to post it on the homepage of his site) if playing 2-channel Atmos on two (non-Atmos) speakers was impossible.

     

    Please let me know your experience after you listen to the file.

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yet your article states that the $400 decoding software is a requirement 

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    Yet your article states that the $400 decoding software is a requirement 

    Correct. That's to create your own 2-channel version of the Atmos MKV file. 

     

    However, once someone has completed the conversion, the resulting file can be played without the decoding software. 

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    33 minutes ago, joelha said:

    You can tell me it's not possible or you can give the download a try.

     

    I've been happily listening to 2-channel Atmos on two non-Atmos speakers for weeks now.

     

    I wouldn't devoted the time to my article (nor would Chris have agreed to post it on the homepage of his site) if playing 2-channel Atmos on two (non-Atmos) speakers was impossible.

     

    Please let me know your experience after you listen to the file.

     

    Joel


    I didn’t comment much earlier because I was confused and thought I misunderstood the topic.

     

    Speakers got nothing to do with ATMOS. What matters is, the minimum number of speakers required to render ATMOS correctly. ATMOS is based on panning sound between speakers to position them in space. That’s what stereo does but it is limited since it is channel based. I guess, it works with your system and Chris but I am still stuck with the basics and still fascinated with Bravia Acoustic Surface speakers playing ATMOS or with the iPads with 4 speakers.

     

    Here is the video explaining ATMOS.

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    46 minutes ago, STC said:


    Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 
     

    For Tidal “ You can stream music in Dolby Atmos on your Dolby Atmos compatible soundbars, TVs, AVRs, in addition to your iOS and Android compatible devices. For a full list of compatible devices, visit our support page.“

     

    and for Apple products “

    If you choose Automatic, here’s what you'll need

    Supported songs will play in Dolby Atmos automatically when you're listening using:

    Any Apple or Beats Bluetooth headphones

    If you’re using headphones that support Spatial Audio with dynamic head tracking, you’ll need to turn on Spatial Audio in Control Centre.

    The built-in speakers on an iPhone XS or later (except iPhone SE), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd generation or later), iPad Pro 11-inch or iPad Air (4th generation or later)”

     

    You cannot produce ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones or AirPods and that too only if they are ATMOS compatible.

     

    Let’s talk about Apple Spatial Audio ATMOS for the moment.

     

    Apple decodes ATMOS streams in all of their music playback hardware.  You can put a 2-channel DAC on a Mac with no issues. (Or and ipad or an iPhone)  I have done it with multiple devices and several DACs  This JUST WORKS and I am pretty sure that Apple is still the only one to do this on desktop hardware.

     

    For Dolby TrueHD

     

    You need to use Dolby Software the Dolby Reference Player to decode the files.  @The Computer Audiophile has outlined this elsewhere.  We create rendered ATMOS files in virtually any speaker configuration from 2-channel up.  SO I have 7.1.4 WAV files right out of the player.

     

     

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, STC said:

    What matters is, the minimum number of speakers required to render ATMOS correctly.

    Two speakers will do it.

     

    However, if you don't want to try my uploaded file on your system and are happy with the sound you're getting then enjoy. 

     

    Joel

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, bobfa said:

     

    Let’s talk about Apple Spatial Audio ATMOS for the moment.

     

    Apple decodes ATMOS streams in all of their music playback hardware.  You can put a 2-channel DAC on a Mac with no issues. (Or and ipad or an iPhone)  I have done it with multiple devices and several DACs  This JUST WORKS and I am pretty sure that Apple is still the only one to do this on desktop hardware.

     

    For Dolby TrueHD

     

    You need to use Dolby Software the Dolby Reference Player to decode the files.  @The Computer Audiophile has outlined this elsewhere.  We create rendered ATMOS files in virtually any speaker configuration from 2-channel up.  SO I have 7.1.4 WAV files right out of the player.

     

     

     

     


     

     

    3 minutes ago, joelha said:

    Two speakers will do it.

     

    However, if you don't want to try my uploaded file on your system and are happy with the sound you're getting then enjoy. 

     

    Joel

     

    Even if you put one speaker sound will come out. That doesn’t mean proper ATMOS rendering. IT will sound different. With music since most sound is within the front channels so you may sense something different and probably better since it is decongested. 
     

    I have been quietly following the ATMOS topic and the more I read about two speakers ATMOS, I am confused further and made my first comment here because this is NOT what ATMOS meant to be. You need at least 4 speakers for the decoder to place the sound. In the absence of other speakers it is like listening to 5.1 with two speakers. Yes, it will sound different but sound meant rest of the 3 speakers are not produced. If you have downsampling to 2 then you are essentially hearing stereo with different mixing.

     

    Is there a software where it says Dolby ATMOS downsample for 2.0 or 2.1?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Ok, I downloaded it and compared to the Qobuz version

     

    the Atmos track has a slightly wider soundstage, it has a much louder bass line and the drum (snare ?) is louder and further to the right . 
     

    The Atmos bass line is louder and tubbier and drum louder to the point they are no longer accompanying the piano, they are the featured instruments as if it is their turn to solo

     

    The non Atmos version is much preferred…, to my ear on my 2 channel only system

     

    I also have the mkv Atmos download I compared on my Trinnov system. Completely different system so inconclusive, but soundstage is bigger as would be expected. The balance of instruments is closer to the Qobuz and preferred over the 2 channel Atmos.  

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, bbosler said:

    The non Atmos version is much preferred…

    Thanks for giving it a try, bbosler. 

     

    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...