Article: How To Decode And Play Auro-3D Music On A Mac

[The Computer Audiophile]

View full article

[Me2]

Now comes a lot of pleasure and work

[jrobbins50]

Chris, for those of us who have 8 available channels, is the only way to listen to Auro-3D tracks is via 5.1, and thus no Auro VST is even required?  Or do you see a way to fold the 4 height channels into 2?

 

Since Auro-3D is channel-based, I also presume that consumers could purchase a set of Auro-3D discs and play them back through JRiver to Audacity for recording and archiving?  They would save the need to always have that $20 monthly license in place for those who care. 

 

And then there is Auro-2D, which I’m not exactly sure what it can do — maybe phantom height channels?  JCR 

[bobfa]

And I thought that playing with Raspberry Pi computers and Operating Systems was following Alice down the Rabbit Hole.

 

Have you found the bottom yet?

[Me2]

46 minutes ago, jrobbins50 said:

And then there is Auro-2D, which I’m not exactly sure what it can do

This is the Auro upmixer with which you can make 3D sound from stereo or other formats, including Atmos. Personally, I think it's an amazing piece of software.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, bobfa said:

And I thought that playing with Raspberry Pi computers and Operating Systems was following Alice down the Rabbit Hole.

 

Have you found the bottom yet?

I love it Bob! If we can't laugh at ourselves, we are in trouble :~)

 

Sometimes we go to the ends of the Earth for good audio.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, jrobbins50 said:

Chris, for those of us who have 8 available channels, is the only way to listen to Auro-3D tracks is via 5.1, and thus no Auro VST is even required?  Or do you see a way to fold the 4 height channels into 2?

 

Since Auro-3D is channel-based, I also presume that consumers could purchase a set of Auro-3D discs and play them back through JRiver to Audacity for recording and archiving?  They would save the need to always have that $20 monthly license in place for those who care. 

 

And then there is Auro-2D, which I’m not exactly sure what it can do — maybe phantom height channels?  JCR 

 

I just trued a few things with a channel configuration like you use. You would set it up for 10 channels in JRMC. The Auro-3D plugin would decode out to 9.1. This is 5.1 +4. Because it's channel based, you would get two height channels, even though the plugin thinks it's sending audio to all four. You aren't missing any more audio because those channels aren't being remapped like Atmos or DTDS:X would do anyway. Thus, telling it you have 10 channels gives you audio in your two height channels. 

 

Discs or downloads, either way. Yes, we could download some Auro-3D content, play it in JRiver using the Auro-3D plugin, capture it in Audacity as a 10 channel WAV file, then have no need for the plugin until we had more content to convert. It would be nice if the downloads were available as 10 channel WAV files to start with. 

[bobfa]

If you had asked me 5 years ago where digital audio reproduction was headed, I could have never imagined what we have covered. I am always amazed at how far we have yet to go in our discovery process.   The process is filled with a lot of fun and the expectation of progress.

 

I am most surprised at the other communities and info you have uncovered in your research.  A very happy journey.  

 

Enjoy the unboxing.  Shoot a Timelapse of the process!

 

 

RJF

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, bobfa said:

If you had asked me 5 years ago where digital audio reproduction was headed, I could have never imagined what we have covered. I am always amazed at how far we have yet to go in our discovery process.   The process is filled with a lot of fun and the expectation of progress.

 

I am most surprised at the other communities and info you have uncovered in your research.  A very happy journey.  

 

Enjoy the unboxing.  Shoot a Timelapse of the process!

 

 

RJF

Agree 100% Bob.

[jrobbins50]

31 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

You aren't missing any more audio because those channels aren't being remapped like Atmos or DTDS:X would do anyway. Thus, telling it you have 10 channels gives you audio in your two height channels. 
 

 

So would I be missing the audio that is being sent to the 2 height channels I don’t have, or does the 4 channel height info fold itself down into 2 channel height?  JCR 

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, jrobbins50 said:

So would I be missing the audio that is being sent to the 2 height channels I don’t have, or does the 4 channel height info fold itself down into 2 channel height?  JCR 

There is no folding, as far as I know with Auro-3D. I believe everything is specified for a channel. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just testing some 2L Auro-3D content. The Blu-ray says it's encoded as 5.0 and should expand to 7.0.4. I think the plugin just counts the LFE channel even when not used. 

 

[retro]

Ok, so when's the DTS-X Pro article coming out?

(Popping popcorn here..)

 

😉😇

[The Computer Audiophile]

10 minutes ago, retro said:

Ok, so when's the DTS-X Pro article coming out?

(Popping popcorn here..)

 

😉😇

I need some DTS:X Pro music :~)

[retro]

No problemo:

 

https://www.amazon.com/The-Blues-Brothers-4K-Blu-ray/dp/B085KJSBYF/ref=as_li_ss_tl?&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&linkCode=sl1&tag=nextgenehom0d-20&linkId=ce43cf84eb6a42034bdf6d964c22d512&language=en_US

 

🙂

[retro]

Seriously, DTS:X seems quite dead, doesn't it?

[The Computer Audiophile]

3 minutes ago, retro said:

Seriously, DTS:X seems quite dead, doesn't it?

For music it’s nonexistent. There are plenty of the old DTS MA HD albums around, but X is a different story. Nobody will make music other than Atmos if they want to deliver to Apple, Amazon, and Tidal. 
 

I should add, niche labels like Bert’s will do Auro-3D, but that starts with 10 channels of DXD, where Atmos just uses 2 more channels. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Auro Technologies just got back to me, saying a consumer version for playing this content isn’t in the pipeline. 

[retro]

Chris,

there has been quite a bit of posts about the Penteo upmixer on several forums like Avsforum and Quadraphonicquad. 

 

Avsforum

 

Quote

To me, listening to a favourite album never released in multichannel as a Penteo Upmix is sensational and is worth the effort as relatively low cost. Given a great stereo mix with superb sonics Penteo sounds just like the real deal. No artefacts, perfect surround music!

Penteo with Izotope Imager is way more interesting than AVR upmixes IMO.

 

Quadraphonicquad

 

Whaddau think? Worth trying out..?

 

Want to try myself, but at the moment, I'm stuck with 2.2. Sad but true. But soon 7.2.4..🙂

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, retro said:

Chris,

there has been quite a bit of posts about the Penteo upmixer on several forums like Avsforum and Quadraphonicquad. 

 

Avsforum

 

 

Quadraphonicquad

 

Whaddau think? Worth trying out..?

 

Want to try myself, but at the moment, I'm stuck with 2.2. Sad but true. But soon 7.2.4..🙂

 

 

Definitely worth trying but definitely not my style :~)

[retro]

2 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Definitely worth trying but definitely not my style :~)

 

Really..? Because its an up-mixer, or..?? Aren't many of the Immersive mixes you now enjoy, especially the older ones, re-mixed and up-mixed in the studio..?!?

Just curious as to why "not my style"..😉..?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, retro said:

 

Really..? Because its an up-mixer, or..?? Aren't many of the Immersive mixes you now enjoy, especially the older ones, re-mixed and up-mixed in the studio..?!?

Just curious as to why "not my style"..😉..?

The up mixer is what gets me. It isn’t what the artist intended:~)

[retro]

45 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The up mixer is what gets me. It isn’t what the artist intended:~)

Well..I'll repeat myself then..😉

 

"Aren't many of the Immersive mixes you now enjoy, especially the older ones, re-mixed and up-mixed in the studio..?!?"

 

The artists, if still alive, are likely not involved att all in the above process. 

For instance, Beatles Abbey Road, the one you chose to rip in your great article. I doubt John, Paul, Ringo and/or George were thinking:

"Wow, this will sound great in an immersive version.."

 

That's one for you to chew on...😉

 

 

(will I get banned now..😎)

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 hour ago, retro said:

Well..I'll repeat myself then..😉

 

"Aren't many of the Immersiv

 

The artists, if still alive, are likely not involved att all in the above process. 

For instance, Beatles Abbey Road, the one you chose to rip in your great article. I doubt John, Paul, Ringo and/or George were thinking:

"Wow, this will sound great in an immersive version.."

 

That's one for you to chew on...😉

 

 

(will I get banned now..😎)

 

huge difference. One is me playing what’s delivered on the album. The other is someone adjusting the mix how ever they wish. Neither is wrong. I just prefer to play the material delivered to me as accurately as possible. 

[retro]

Sure. Nothing wrong with that. I used to be an Audiophile and a purist too. But I've grown up. Finally..😎

To me, everything that enhances my listening experience is a step in the right direction. Downmix, upmix, remix, remux, demux..don't care.

 

But this about what the artist intended..well..that's debateble in many or most releases, IMHO. 

 

Will definately give Penteo a testrun later on.