Jump to content
  • The Computer Audiophile
    The Computer Audiophile

    The Immersive Audiophile Update 1

     


    I'm a couple weeks into my research, and Blu-ray Disc ripping, and have collected some good information. I'm sure this information is nothing new to the savvy multichannel enthusiasts in this community, but based on my conversations with many others, there are tons of music lovers who are interested in Atmos and eager to learn. 

     

    I continue to be surprised at how Wild West this area of music playback remains, years after its release. The more I learn, the more parallels to computer audio I see. For example, trying to get decoded Atmos audio out of a computer ranges from simple (Dolby Digital Plus) to impossible (Dolby TrueHD). Searching for ways to achieve the impossible, as many of us like to do, leads to a few possibilities but after chasing them down and twisting the possible solutions into a logical pretzel, they are dead ends. 

     

    Dolby has so tightly controlled TrueHD decoding on computers that it doesn't make sense for me to continue pursuing the path. I could probably get something to work with a professional digital audio workstation, but even with that there are no guarantees because of the file formats required. In addition, it doesn't interest me too much to find a solution that works only for me and maybe a couple people willing to use kludgy audio systems. I remain optimistic that someone will find a solution to this issue. 

     

    The bottom line is if people want to play lossless TrueHD, they have to use HDMI and an Atmos processor. Don't get me started with vaporware products promising HDMI to AES67 conversion (Arvus). The reason why I touch on this HDMI thing because there are other possible solutions for Atmos playback, that don't involve a traditional processor with HDMI input. I will get into those in update 2. 

     

    Note: There is no industry accepted source of TrueHD content on a computer, so there is no solution to play this content. All such content is from ripped Blu-rays at the moment, and we know how the industry views ripped Blu-ray Discs. 

     

    I found out from Trinnov why my Apple Music streams were output as 7.1.4 but not my TrueHD rips being played back on the same Mac. Because macOS only supports Dolby Digital Plus, it isn't a native TrueHD decoder. TrueHD content will then be sent out as basic TrueHD, without height channels in the Atmos metadata. I knew about the DD+ issue on Mac, but could figure out why the Mac would play TrueHD content as 7.1. Now I know.

     

    Much of my research right now surrounds processors for decoding Atmos. I've talk to people in the industry and manufacturers about the differences, and they are pretty large. The big ones for me are the difference between software and hardware decoding, room correction, and upgradability. Almost all processors use a mass produced chip to decode Atmos audio. This isn't bad in and of itself, it's just the mainstream way of decoding. Other processors handle decoding in software. These are endlessly flexible, upgradable, and appear to be capable of processing more channels at higher sample rates. Software based processors typically use a computer running Linux, so they run like an appliance. The end user doesn't interact at all with the operating system. 

     

    Some processors I'm focusing on today are from Trinnov, Datasat, Lyngdorf, and the new McIntosh MX180 has be intrigued. As always, I love the recommendations people are sending me. I'm all for whatever works for each listener, and very interested in all ways of doing this. 

     

    A couple things I really want in a processor are the ability to know which speakers are receiving / playing the audio signal, and identification of the incoming stream as lossless TrueHD or lossy Dolby Digital Plus. I know Trinnov can show much of this, can solo a single channel to hear the output, and can even show an object based view in real time. But, one hiccup is that the Trinnov processors identify all incoming Apple TV streams as lossless TrueHD, when they are really lossy DD+. I'm unsure what would happen if I connected my Mac Mini (M1) via HDMI and bit streamed the content from Kodi, but I believe it will show correctly. 

     

    Note: Newbies should understand that creating an Atmos mix involves the engineer placing sounds wherever s/he wants in space, not in specific channels like the old days. These sounds are the objects everyone talks about when Atmos is referenced. For example, a vocal can be placed front and center, without regard to number and placement of channels in a listeners home or headphones. Originally the core or bed channels were to be the 7 (or so) at ear level and the objects based audio as to be the height channels. In reality, mixing engineers are using object based placement for everything, except the LFE channel which remains really the only bed / core channel. 

     

    Getting back to HDMI input for a second. HDMI is required for the Atmos heigh channels to work for lossless TrueHD. I can get them to work over Ravenna / AES67 with a Merging Technologies device, but this only for lossy DD+. Atmos audio coming into a processor over HDMI also contains metadata that directs sound to the height channels. This is a bit different for audiophiles because a 7.1 stream can be decoded to 7.1.4, with 8 channels of data plus metadata. Ripping Atmos music from a Blu-ray Disc one can see Atmos TrueHD 7.1 channels, but if used by the mixing engineer, it will play as 7.1.4. This is partially why FLAC, with its limit of 8 channels, doesn't work for Atmos playback. MKA, M4A, and MKV files work best. 

     

    I have emails into Tidal, Dolby, and others about some of this stuff. I really want to know if Tidal is going to enable Atmos playback on the desktop. 

     

    Last, when texting with a recording engineer friend of mine, he asked if I though if people would really install 12 speakers in their homes for Atmos playback. Thinking about this further, I realized the install base for Atmos capable playback is already exponentially higher than high end two channel. Yes, some of these systems are Atmos soundbars, but it may be an entry into higher fidelity for some people. Everyone starts somewhere. As for us audiophiles, if out goal is to playback music as the artist intended, Atmos is required for a 7.1.4 mix. Doing this at the highest level we can, within space and budget constraints, is what audiophiles are all about. 

     

    Given that the vast majority of my music is two channel, that's how I'll be listening the vast majority of the time. Remember, I'm a card carrying, knuckle dragging, audiophile with zero intentions of abandoning two channel. I don't yet see a high end path for my two systems to use the same processor. However, because I'm using Constellation Audio amplifiers for my front two channels, I can flip a switch on the back to from a high end two channel to multi channel system very easily. It's the only way to get ultimate fidelity with DACs from dCS, EMM Labs, etc... Atmos is supplemental for me.

     

    That wraps update 1 in my Immersive Audiophile series. In update 2, I'll cover my research into NOT using a traditional processor and saving many thousands of dollars. Keep the comments, questions, and information coming!

     

     




    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    2 hours ago, Tubessuckclassdrules said:

    I find video to be a welcome enhancement to the musical experience with live music. After all we get to see the performance with our eyes when at the live event as well. 

    I prefer theater of the mind. I've always been an audiophile that likes audio only. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

    I prefer theater of the mind. I've always been an audiophile that likes audio only. 

     

    2 hours ago, Tubessuckclassdrules said:

    Do you close your eyes when you go watch a live performance? 😂

     

    Nothing whatsoever against those who like Video entertainment / Video presentations of Live music! - all the same:

    1. I find music primarily an emotional language but also an intellectual one - even if rock 'n' roll. My imagination runs away. I escape. I am in another world or worlds - or another episode of time - even if my eyes are open.

    2. Most recorded music isn't Live anyway. But either way - above 1. true for me.

    Edit: I do like documentaries about music - including Artists. But that's not the same realm as listening for engagement with music.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, Tubessuckclassdrules said:

    Things might change if you experienced an Atmos audio concert with 8K TV, and the audio experience tuned by the artist together with todays top studio engineers for the most realism ... As of today nobody offers an Atmos solution that allows for high end audio. Unless you get a Trinnov or Storm Audio processor and send the audio to a killer DAC via Ravenna. That’s the only way. Because the DAC’s built into all processors on the market as of today are no better than a $9 Apple lightning dongle DAC. So unless someone has experienced this, they don’t understand what Atmos audio can offer. 

     

    Regarding Video, I just don't have the inclination. Just like I'd rather tour Scotland in a camper van than embark on a fancy package tour of the world via cruise ship. It's about freedom and independence. These things are priceless to me. If I had all the resources in the world I wouldn't establish a home Video extravaganza.

    I have no doubt that 8K realism is what floats your boat. That's very cool.

    Regards "tuned by the Artist" - you may understand that mQa engenders scepticism. Anyway - tbh - I get more out of pre 1980 Popular music. And there is too much in the way of 20th Century Classical performances (Toscanini etc) to delve into before getting tuned into technology for its own sake.

    I'm a little out of line because I'm not pursuing Atmos. I get and use HQplayer. But I'm not otherwise bent on DSP.

    Really I just chimed in because I liked the Comment "I prefer theater of the mind. I've always been an audiophile that likes audio only." Some things jump out at you! Hope you don't mind.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, Iving said:

    Really I just chimed in because I liked the Comment "I prefer theater of the mind. I've always been an audiophile that likes audio only." Some things jump out at you! Hope you don't mind.

     

    All good :~)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Here’s what I am doing at the moment. It may be closer to what many MCH-dedicated audiophiles use. It certainly is a 5.2 high end system for DSD and FLAC MCH listening: Revel F328Bes for mains, Revel C426Be for center and Revel C773s for surrounds; two Goldenear SuperSub XXLs; Bel Canto amplification for mains and center and Rotel for surrounds; Okto dac8pro DAC; switched by a Coleman switch with no preamp; and fed by CAPS20 server with Audiolense XO DSP in HQPlayer controlled by Roon.

    If Atmos could sound as good, and there was adequate content to listen to, I’d be quite pleased. 

     

    To experiment with Atmos, I also have a Marantz AV-8802A prepro that also runs through the Coleman switch.  Yes, it only has ARC and not eARC, so compressed Dolby Atmos over DD+ is what I’m limited to. I do have an LG CX77 in the room, and it could feed uncompressed Atmos if I upgraded to the AV-8805, but I’m not ready to just go do that. And yes, I understand the DAC for Atmos in these consumer processors is not of the caliber of my standalone Okto DAC.

     

    For Atmos, I use DSP in the Marantz with an Audyssey Pro kit and started simple with a couple of Klipsch R41-SAs for height speakers on top of the mains to bounce off of our flat ceiling, powered by a little Parasound amp. I’m not ready to start cutting more holes in the walls for additional speakers. So, I guess I have a 5.1.2 Atmos setup (with two subs, of course).

     

    I’m not sure where to find music content that I can stream back from the CX77. Apple?  (I don’t have that just now.) So far, it’s been movies — the new West Side Story soundtrack on HBOMax is quite impressive and with that TV, it’s quite the home movie experience. But, it sonically pales in comparison to DSD and FLAC MCH audio. This may be both being of the compressed nature of the stream and the quality of the Atmos decoding chip in the Marantz.  I’m not sure what percentage degradation to assign to each. 

     

    In any case, I’m happy that Chris is spending the major time/dollars to sort this out for us mainstream MCH audiophiles. The box that Tubesuckclassdrules describes above also sounds interesting — but I would not likely jump in only to require upgrading all of my amplification to Ravenna as a prerequisite. Yet. 
     

    We will also need a way to apply DSP like Audiolense to a decoded Atmos stream. Right now, elGrupo suggests the only way is to take the analog outputs of a prepro into a MCH DAW for conversion back to FLAC streams that the DSP software can work on. Again, more than I want to do just now. But, Chris, the DSP aspect should not be ignored in your research. 
     

    Cheers. JCR 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, jrobbins50 said:

    But, Chris, the DSP aspect should not be ignored in your research.

    Oh yes, it's going to be the topic of at least one article, but likely more. I have something up my sleeve as of 30 minutes ago. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    When I was forced to combine my audio and video systems last year after a move into a different shaped loft, I decided to make my hifi speakers the main LR in the theater, added a matching center channel (Revel Studio2 and Voice2) and applied my old LR mains (Dynaudio 1.3SE) for sides; this is the basis for a pretty good 5.1 audio system.  I then built out a higher end theater front end with a Monolith HTP-1 in front of an 11X for surrounds.  I bifurcated the audio system for parallel use by putting an XLR switch box in front of my main 2-channel power amp.  Input is either from the pure audio system via my audio-only preamp or the HTP-1.  Dual, fully separate front-ends.  While I use acourate filters for RC on the audio system, I have the HTP-1 set up with full DIRAC + DL Bass management. For multichannel files, I run from Roon to the HTP-1 via HDMI.  I can apply upmixers this way to activate the wides and tops.  I suspect that this is really the only way to get the Atmos experience with any quality right now.  Although the HTP-1 is limited to 48khz/24bit processing, I just decimate all files to that format in Roon to send out.  Playing a bluray audio disc it automatically does that.  I think it is a worthwhile endeavor, Chris.  But finding your sweet spot of utility is key.  I could set up a system for 5.1 high-rate DSD for multichannel files and go higher end. Those DACs exist and several folks here are doing that including Kal.  For me, the HTP-1 is enough and better suited to my needs.  I could justify the cost to upgrade my theater experience and get pretty damn good multichannel playback of files and discs as a bonus.  The Dolby and DTS upmixers allow some additional sweetening, and Auro 3d is also pretty good for music; they all sound a bit differrent. But better I suspect than Apple spatial audio in almost every situation. You can bet that a lot of their files are just being processed through an upmixing algorithm anyway from original 2-channel material and then mapped to a lossy streaming format in Dolby+.  Good luck on the journey to find your musical bliss

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Quote

    Thinking about this further, I realized the install base for Atmos capable playback is already exponentially higher than high end two channel.

     

    Even an inexpensive Atmos theater entertains families, friends, birthday parties, you name it. 

     

    Anecdotal at best but I know some guys who have installed in-ceiling atoms on the cheap and it's a really fun experience.

     

    I don't count sound bars and mono smart speakers as being Atmos capable. They are but seem silly.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I'm a knuckle dragging two channel and a hard core multichannel guy, and have been for many years. One is not "better" than the other. Instead, they are different and "better in their own way."

     

    That being said, most of my two channel listening these days is two channel music with Auro providing modest enhancements using a Trinnov processor. If you keep Center Spread "on" and the effects channels very (very!) light it provides a nice listening experience.

     

    In years past I augmented a purist two channel setup with surround processing. I had a purist two-channel rig (BAT monoblocks, Audio Research Pre and custom line arrays) that maintained absolute two channel fidelity. I sent a second output from the AR Pre to a surround processor that fed only surround speakers (no center channel) and kept those surrounds 5-8db below "normal" matched surround levels. While McGuyver-like it offered outstanding performance: it did not degrade my two channel purist playback chain while adding subtle ambience that purist two channel doesn't (usually) provide.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Multi- channel audio really needs to have speakers that are all voiced the same as it helps with cohesiveness of the image.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    58 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

    In principle.  However, I would prioritize the base-level speakers over the height/top speakers.

    This is particularly true when using room correction, since any differences in voicing are swamped by the correction of frequency and phase anomalies.  I don't think it makes much difference at all using different brands with different voicing in that case. The only exception would be very different operational methodologies, planars vs boxes, omnidirectional vs front radiators, etc.  If the way the speaker couples to the room is vastly different and they have vastly different power responses, then the application of RC probably isn't going to mitigate differences that much other than to even the frequency response.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, I spent so much time today trying to get TrueHD to play from a computer, so I could get the height channels. I really thought I had something when I got the Dolby Atmos Renderer that even shows I have 7.1.4 audio playing and all the channels in use. 

     

    So far it's another dead end, but I'm still working on it. I have an unconventional way to getting audio to this renderer, but it isn't working yet. 

     

    Screen Shot 2022-03-09 at 5.29.35 PM.png

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    My understanding is that Height channels are created by an Atmos renderer. The don't exist as channels, just rendered from objects to Your set amount of Height/Atmos speakers.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, James lee said:

    My understanding is that Height channels are created by an Atmos renderer. The don't exist as channels, just rendered from objects to Your set amount of Height/Atmos speakers.

    The only real channel is LFE. And yes, they are created by a renderer like the Dolby renderer software I have.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 minutes ago, James lee said:

    Does TrueHd have Height? It's not Atmos.

    TrueHD is a lossless codec, not a format.  AFAIK, there is no more than 7.1 in TrueHD on disc.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, James lee said:

    Does TrueHd have Height? It's not Atmos.

    Yes, many Blu-Ray/UHDs have lossless TrueHD-Atmos tracks.

     

    Yello's Point in 7.1-Atmos TrueHD sounds quite impressive. Likewise the Beatles' multichannels sound good with more subtle effects for the height channels.

     

    Seriously guys, sometimes you just have to sit back and enjoy instead of obsessing about the gear - especially with multichannel ;-). 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

    TrueHD is a lossless codec, not a format.  AFAIK, there is no more than 7.1 in TrueHD on disc.

    TrueHD has as tons more channels than 7.1. It can have 7.1.4. Discs only say 7.1, but as you know that expands with metadata.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    From "trusty" Wikipedia - "The Dolby TrueHD specification provides for up to 16 discrete audio channels, each with a sampling rate of up to 192kHz and sample depth of up to 24 bits"

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, James lee said:

    Does TrueHd have Height? It's not Atmos.

    Answer myself. Yes Atmos can be in TrueHD

    It can be in Dolby Digital Plus also but is not lossless. Just updating my brain. Here's a simple vid on that.

     

    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...