Jump to content
IGNORED

Article: Thoughts On Immersive Audio


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, DigiPete said:


Thanks Chris for reminding me.

I remember seeing the Arvus earlier, but it was always an "elusive" box.
Same pricing of $4-5k mentioned around but not on their homepage, pre-ordering and none for sale.
I suppose this is the price we pay for being a small subset of a subset of audiophiles (also a small subset).
Now, what bullet to bite???


 

Hi @DigiPete, I was thinking about this more today. I know, that’s what I do. Eat, sleep, and breathe this stuff. The issue with the Arvus going AES out is the lack of DSP if the source is something like an Apple TV. Apple TV > Arvus > AES > speakers, leaves no place for room correction. 
 

On the other hand, using the Arvus Ravenna outputs, the signal can be sent to a computer running convolution, then sent back out via Ravenna. If your speakers had Tavenna input, all would be right :~)

 

Also, if your speakers had Ravenna input, you could use a Mac with Apple Music and convolution, to send right to them. No Arvus needed. 

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
32 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi @DigiPete, I was thinking about this more today. I know, that’s what I do. Eat, sleep, and breathe this stuff. The issue with the Arvus going AES out is the lack of DSP if the source is something like an Apple TV. Apple TV > Arvus > AES > speakers, leaves no place for room correction. 
 

On the other hand, using the Arvus Ravenna outputs, the signal can be sent to a computer running convolution, then sent back out via Ravenna. If your speakers had Tavenna input, all would be right :~)

 

Also, if your speakers had Ravenna input, you could use a Mac with Apple Music and convolution, to send right to them. No Arvus needed. 


Yup, or you have a full Genelec SAM monitor system controlled by GLM and fed pure AES/EBU.
That means a full suite of low latency DSP right in the monitors including room compensation, and volume. 
I just need a couple of extra monitors to complete a 5.1.4 system . . .

Genelec actually has the 40XX series of "Smart IP Installation Speakers"  with AES67 / Dante Input and PoE.
Unfortunately none with coaxial drivers - so a no-go for me.
There is no way back, once you experience that co-ax imaging 😉

Promise Pegasus2 R6 12TB -> Thunderbolt2 ->
MacBook Pro M1 Pro -> Motu 8D -> AES/EBU ->
Main: Genelec 5 x 8260A + 2 x 8250 + 2 x 8330 + 7271A sub
Boat: Genelec 8010 + 5040 sub

Hifiman Sundara, Sennheiser PXC 550 II, Smyth Realiser A16
Blog: “Confessions of a DigiPhile”

Link to comment
9 hours ago, DigiPete said:


Yup, or you have a full Genelec SAM monitor system controlled by GLM and fed pure AES/EBU.
That means a full suite of low latency DSP right in the monitors including room compensation, and volume. 
I just need a couple of extra monitors to complete a 5.1.4 system . . .

Genelec actually has the 40XX series of "Smart IP Installation Speakers"  with AES67 / Dante Input and PoE.
Unfortunately none with coaxial drivers - so a no-go for me.
There is no way back, once you experience that co-ax imaging 😉

Here you go @DigiPete, create a new room with this setup😁

 

https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/ImmersiveSysG1--genelec-7.14-immersive-audio-studio-monitor-system

Computer setup - Roon/Qobuz - PS Audio P5 Regenerator - HIFI Rose 250A Streamer - Emotiva XPA-2 Harbeth P3ESR XD - Rel  R-528 Sub

Comfy Chair - Schitt Jotunheim - Meze Audio Empyrean w/Mitch Barnett's Accurate Sound FilterSet

Link to comment
2 hours ago, ShawnC said:


Like Chris, my brain won't let me off the hook . . . . 

How I would start over, if I realistically spec'ed a new 5.1.4 Genelec system from scratch? 

  • Base layer: 3 x 8341 (L/C/R) + 2 x 8330 L/R rear
  • Sub / LFE: 2 x 7360
  • Height layer: 4 x 8330


Multiple Atmos studios have been build like that around the world - naturally in 7.1.4.
Totally makes sense to me.

I'd additionally need:

  • GLM kit - calibration & control
  • Rotary volume knob - 9301B
  • Remote  - 9101B -  On/OFF, Volume, mute , change of group presets.
  • Multi-channel AES/EBU interface (sub integration) - 9301B just about to be released


At $ / € 20k, this monitor system delivers insane quality for the money with fast & easy setup and predictable room compensation.

Way too much?
Wanna go analogue & 'roll your own' ( dac, room compensation, volume control etc.)?
Still want the SPL and bang for the buck?
Go Motu + Kali 

Base layer: 7 x Kali IN-8 (2nd wave)
Sub / LFE: 1 x Kali WS-12
Height layer: 4 x Kali IN-5
DAC / DSP: 2 x Motu 8A

ESS DAC's in the Motu's are rather good and you can control volume in all 16 channels from the MOTU web app or app on your computer. 
The Moto has a limited 4 PEQ's per channel, but it'll still help you harness those low's.

This monitor system also delivers insane quality for the money, a little less perfect and requires way more tinkering.
$ / € 6k !!!!!

Promise Pegasus2 R6 12TB -> Thunderbolt2 ->
MacBook Pro M1 Pro -> Motu 8D -> AES/EBU ->
Main: Genelec 5 x 8260A + 2 x 8250 + 2 x 8330 + 7271A sub
Boat: Genelec 8010 + 5040 sub

Hifiman Sundara, Sennheiser PXC 550 II, Smyth Realiser A16
Blog: “Confessions of a DigiPhile”

Link to comment

What an impressive journey toward a first rate immersive system! I would love to sample it through headphones if you could get one of your many industry friends to loan you a binaural recording head…but maybe you already planned something in that fashion.

 

Owning already a very good SACD 4.1 system that has wiring all over the place, I wanted a simpler secondary Wifi based Atmos system to stream immersive classical recordings and settled finally for a Sonos Beam soundbar complemented with a Sonos amp driving a pair old Dynaco speakers that I had hanging around for surround. This setup really does the trick for me! 

 

The back speakers are angled towards the ceiling on each side of a couch, and facing toward the front, giving some height information. The result with well done recordings is quite amazing to me. The concert hall is very well recreated by the Sonos algorithm with this setup, much much better than with only a soundbar!

 

I finally gave up on Apple and went with Amazon Music because the service streams directly to my Sonos system without having to go through Apple hardware. Apple Music is much better looking than Amazon, granted, but you can still find the same Atmos recordings on Amazon if you know what to look for.

 

The latest gem I found is the DG Atmos version of Mahler symphony no. 3 with Pierre Boulez and the Wiener Philarmoniker, incredible dynamics and the quality of that concert hall very well recreated, even through a system that costs ten times less than my SACD main one…

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, GillesP said:

Apple Music is much better looking than Amazon, granted, but you can still find the same Atmos recordings on Amazon if you know what to look for.

Really?  Not what I am finding, but then I guess I don't know what to look for?

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, ted_b said:

Really?  Not what I am finding, but then I guess I don't know what to look for?

I was referring to the dark look with strange colors that I find ugly in the Amazon Music app compared to Apple Music, but also they don't do good Spatial Audio suggestions as Apple does. You have to enter keywords (composer work etc) in the search field and look for recordings showing the Dolby Atmos tag, then in my case, enter the same thing in the Sonos S2 app on the phone to stream the result. I also had Apple Music as a service in the Sonos app for a while but they only stream stereo...

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

As far as I know, Amazon only streams Atmos to its own speakers. Stereo to everything else. 

Atmos works fine with my Sonos soundbar and surrounds with Amazon Music...

 

From the Sonos support page:

 

Listen to Dolby Atmos on Sonos

 

 

Sonos Arc and Beam (Gen 2) support Dolby Atmos audio. This article outlines the main factors that determine if your Arc or Beam (Gen 2) can play Dolby Atmos audio. These factors include the HDMI connections on your TV, streaming services like Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, and physical source devices like Fire TV, Roku, or Apple TV. If Arc or Beam (Gen 2) are receiving an Atmos signal, it will be displayed within the Sonos App on both the “Now Playing” screen and within the “About My System” menu.

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, GillesP said:

Atmos works fine with my Sonos soundbar and surrounds with Amazon Music...

 

From the Sonos support page:

 

Listen to Dolby Atmos on Sonos

 

 

Sonos Arc and Beam (Gen 2) support Dolby Atmos audio. This article outlines the main factors that determine if your Arc or Beam (Gen 2) can play Dolby Atmos audio. These factors include the HDMI connections on your TV, streaming services like Netflix or Amazon Prime Video, and physical source devices like Fire TV, Roku, or Apple TV. If Arc or Beam (Gen 2) are receiving an Atmos signal, it will be displayed within the Sonos App on both the “Now Playing” screen and within the “About My System” menu.

 

I certainly see that, but both Dolby and Amazon say it's only available on headphones via mobile device and an Amazon smart speaker. 

 

https://www.dolby.com/experience/amazon-music/

 

https://www.amazon.com/music/unlimited/why-hd?view=spatial-audio

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment

Thanks for the article, I have a modest atmos system with Emotiva speakers and marantz receiver and I also been enjoying Dolby Atmos music releases more than ever.  I used to listen to the occasional SACD but honestly the convenience of Apple music is really making it easier.  Probably for another thread but been frustrated with Tidal App on apple TV, the atmos mixes are at least 10db lower than regular tracks, I really have to crank the volume on those.  For for now i am prefer Apple for atmos music.  

Link to comment

Thanks Chris for this great series of articles on “Immersive”. 

 

You’ve probably already thought of this; but another useful article could be distinguishing “Immersive” from traditional MCH audio. There’s obviously a tendency for us to lump the two together, as they are in many respects, very similar.

 

As I understand it, the main differences are…

 

1/ Traditional Multichannel is channel based; meaning there’s a hard limit as to the number of channels on any given MCH recording. 8 channels (or 7.1) seems to be the limit. If the number of channels on an MCH recording exceeds the channels in your system, you’ll need to down-mix. For example from 7.1 to 5.1. Though most available MCH recordings are 5.1 (with some at 5.0, 4.1?, 4.0, 3.1?, 3.0, or 2.1, until we’re finally back to good ol’ 2 channel stereo).  Where 7.1 traditional MCH exists, it is designated as, Left front, Right front, Center, Sub, Left rear, Right rear, Left side, Right side. There is no concept of a height channel or channels.

 

2/ “Immersive” is “object” based. So there is no hard limit, as far as the recording is concerned. I suppose, theoretically at least, every instrument/voice on a recording could be its own “object”. This means that an “Immersive” recording is more likely to require down-mixing, or rather allocation/distribution of the “objects” amongst the physical channels in a given system. There is, however, a practical limit as to how many physical channels are likely to be available in a given speaker based system. Perhaps this will converge on 12, in a similar sense that for traditional multi-channel, 5.1 is the most typical.

 

3/ The main contribution that “Immersive” brings to the table, appears to be the addition of one or more height channels. So the question that always comes to my mind, is what advantage do height channels bring to music? I believe you already addressed this to some degree in previous articles. It does also seem that this will depend on the genre of music and where it was recorded. Classical music recorded in a traditional concert hall built, with that music in mind, will generate multiple reflections from all directions within the hall, which will be experienced differently, depending on where the listener is seated. Other genres of music, with far fewer instruments and voices, recorded in a studio also involve reflections, though these can, presumably be more easily controlled. It also becomes a question of which perspective on the music the listener will experience. Do you want to be in the middle of the band or have the band perform in front of you?; etc. Artificial spaces can also be eletronically generated with effects, and these become part of the artistic creation. Perhaps we are entering a time though, where there’ll be greater audience or listener participation in the final result? Two channel recordings, of course, treat all genres of music equally, because they are equally limited.

 

I think it’s useful to distinguish clearly between “Immersive” and traditional multi-channel. If we lump the two together, it can be argued that Qobuz already support immersive, because they have been streaming traditional, full quality 5.1 multi-channel, for some years now. Most of these titles are classical/opera and most are at 96/24 or 192/24 for all 6 channels!

 

4/ Obviously “Immersive” in the form of Dolby Atmos and similar, object based formats can be experienced on headphones (any headphones actually). Whereas with traditional Multichannel recordings, headphone listeners need not apply. For headphone listening, the result is perhaps similar to the old Binaural/Dummy head recordings, which have been around since at least the 70s. I suppose with headphones no down-mixing or allocation of objects to different physical channels is performed, even though there are only two channels available. I’m guessing this is because the room is taken out of the equation, so the “spatial” illusion can be re-created to a degree, because of the proximity of the transducers to our ears. I must admit though, my understanding of this is shaky.  I’ve even wondered if this couldn’t be experienced to some degree with nearfield speaker listening, whereby a pair of speakers could act like giant headphones.

 

5/ Where you have full quality Dolby Atmos recordings available (currently only on some blu-ray discs), you can rip then decode them using the Dolby Reference Player, to the number of physical channels your speaker system has. If you have enough physical channels, these could include at least one height channel. If not, the result of your decoding would be the same as a traditional Multi-channel recording, for example at 5.1, if that’s the number of channels you have; except the sample rate may be limited to 48khz for each channel, as necessary to squeeze all those additional channels onto the disc. In that case an actual traditional MCH recording would, presumably be better, if each channel were >= 96khz.

 

The decoded Dolby Atmos from a Blu-Ray results in regular 48khz/24 bit PCM per channel, which could have convolution performed on the channels, for example via HQPlayer playback.

 

A spatial stream from Apple Music can be decoded by MacOS in real-time and fed into HQPlayer’s input mode.

 

To conclude, I’m sure the results of, particularly full quality Dolby Atmos, on a system, such as the one you’ve built, can be truly spectacular. This seems even more dependant on the job done by the mixing engineer and the genre of music, than with stereo recordings though, and with legacy recordings, risks moving away from the original artsts intentions.

 

I’ve realised I needed to type this out to confirm my own understanding. So please correct me wherever I’ve made any mistakes and keep the great articles coming, if you can tear yourself away from listening!

Owner of: Sound Galleries, High-End Audio Dealer, Monaco

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Geoffrey Armstrong said:

1/ Traditional Multichannel is channel based; meaning there’s a hard limit as to the number of channels on any given MCH recording. 8 channels (or 7.1) seems to be the limit. If the number of channels on an MCH recording exceeds the channels in your system, you’ll need to down-mix. For example from 7.1 to 5.1. Though most available MCH recordings are 5.1 (with some at 5.0, 4.1?, 4.0, 3.1?, 3.0, or 2.1, until we’re finally back to good ol’ 2 channel stereo).  Where 7.1 traditional MCH exists, it is designated as, Left front, Right front, Center, Sub, Left rear, Right rear, Left side, Right side. There is no concept of a height channel or channels.

All that is true for mainstream multichannel but several labels have, over the years introduced height channels.  I am thinking of Telarc, Chesky and MDG ("2+2+2"0.

3 hours ago, Geoffrey Armstrong said:

I think it’s useful to distinguish clearly between “Immersive” and traditional multi-channel. If we lump the two together, it can be argued that Qobuz already support immersive, because they have been streaming traditional, full quality 5.1 multi-channel, for some years now. Most of these titles are classical/opera and most are at 96/24 or 192/24 for all 6 channels!

Agreed except that the Qobuz app does not support any multichannel at this time and it is necessary to utilize Roon (are there others?) in order to hear those tracks in more than stereo.

3 hours ago, Geoffrey Armstrong said:

4/ Obviously “Immersive” in the form of Dolby Atmos and similar, object based formats can be experienced on headphones (any headphones actually). Whereas with traditional Multichannel recordings, headphone listeners need not apply.

Not if you have a Smyth Realiser on hand.

3 hours ago, Geoffrey Armstrong said:

I’ve realised I needed to type this out to confirm my own understanding. So please correct me wherever I’ve made any mistakes and keep the great articles coming, if you can tear yourself away from listening!

I think you did a great job.

Kal Rubinson

Senior Contributing Editor, Stereophile

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Geoffrey Armstrong said:

Thanks Chris for this great series of articles on “Immersive”. 

 

You’ve probably already thought of this; but another useful article could be distinguishing “Immersive” from traditional MCH audio. There’s obviously a tendency for us to lump the two together, as they are in many respects, very similar.

 

As I understand it, the main differences are…

 

1/ Traditional Multichannel is channel based; meaning there’s a hard limit as to the number of channels on any given MCH recording. 8 channels (or 7.1) seems to be the limit. If the number of channels on an MCH recording exceeds the channels in your system, you’ll need to down-mix. For example from 7.1 to 5.1. Though most available MCH recordings are 5.1 (with some at 5.0, 4.1?, 4.0, 3.1?, 3.0, or 2.1, until we’re finally back to good ol’ 2 channel stereo).  Where 7.1 traditional MCH exists, it is designated as, Left front, Right front, Center, Sub, Left rear, Right rear, Left side, Right side. There is no concept of a height channel or channels.

 

2/ “Immersive” is “object” based. So there is no hard limit, as far as the recording is concerned. I suppose, theoretically at least, every instrument/voice on a recording could be its own “object”. This means that an “Immersive” recording is more likely to require down-mixing, or rather allocation/distribution of the “objects” amongst the physical channels in a given system. There is, however, a practical limit as to how many physical channels are likely to be available in a given speaker based system. Perhaps this will converge on 12, in a similar sense that for traditional multi-channel, 5.1 is the most typical.

 

3/ The main contribution that “Immersive” brings to the table, appears to be the addition of one or more height channels. So the question that always comes to my mind, is what advantage do height channels bring to music? I believe you already addressed this to some degree in previous articles. It does also seem that this will depend on the genre of music and where it was recorded. Classical music recorded in a traditional concert hall built, with that music in mind, will generate multiple reflections from all directions within the hall, which will be experienced differently, depending on where the listener is seated. Other genres of music, with far fewer instruments and voices, recorded in a studio also involve reflections, though these can, presumably be more easily controlled. It also becomes a question of which perspective on the music the listener will experience. Do you want to be in the middle of the band or have the band perform in front of you?; etc. Artificial spaces can also be eletronically generated with effects, and these become part of the artistic creation. Perhaps we are entering a time though, where there’ll be greater audience or listener participation in the final result? Two channel recordings, of course, treat all genres of music equally, because they are equally limited.

 

I think it’s useful to distinguish clearly between “Immersive” and traditional multi-channel. If we lump the two together, it can be argued that Qobuz already support immersive, because they have been streaming traditional, full quality 5.1 multi-channel, for some years now. Most of these titles are classical/opera and most are at 96/24 or 192/24 for all 6 channels!

 

4/ Obviously “Immersive” in the form of Dolby Atmos and similar, object based formats can be experienced on headphones (any headphones actually). Whereas with traditional Multichannel recordings, headphone listeners need not apply. For headphone listening, the result is perhaps similar to the old Binaural/Dummy head recordings, which have been around since at least the 70s. I suppose with headphones no down-mixing or allocation of objects to different physical channels is performed, even though there are only two channels available. I’m guessing this is because the room is taken out of the equation, so the “spatial” illusion can be re-created to a degree, because of the proximity of the transducers to our ears. I must admit though, my understanding of this is shaky.  I’ve even wondered if this couldn’t be experienced to some degree with nearfield speaker listening, whereby a pair of speakers could act like giant headphones.

 

5/ Where you have full quality Dolby Atmos recordings available (currently only on some blu-ray discs), you can rip then decode them using the Dolby Reference Player, to the number of physical channels your speaker system has. If you have enough physical channels, these could include at least one height channel. If not, the result of your decoding would be the same as a traditional Multi-channel recording, for example at 5.1, if that’s the number of channels you have; except the sample rate may be limited to 48khz for each channel, as necessary to squeeze all those additional channels onto the disc. In that case an actual traditional MCH recording would, presumably be better, if each channel were >= 96khz.

 

The decoded Dolby Atmos from a Blu-Ray results in regular 48khz/24 bit PCM per channel, which could have convolution performed on the channels, for example via HQPlayer playback.

 

A spatial stream from Apple Music can be decoded by MacOS in real-time and fed into HQPlayer’s input mode.

 

To conclude, I’m sure the results of, particularly full quality Dolby Atmos, on a system, such as the one you’ve built, can be truly spectacular. This seems even more dependant on the job done by the mixing engineer and the genre of music, than with stereo recordings though, and with legacy recordings, risks moving away from the original artsts intentions.

 

I’ve realised I needed to type this out to confirm my own understanding. So please correct me wherever I’ve made any mistakes and keep the great articles coming, if you can tear yourself away from listening!

Hi @Geoffrey Armstrong Great post. I’ll do my best to reply from the beach in Northern Minnesota (Independence Day holiday :~)). 
 

Immersive can’t be distinguished from traditional multichannel because it’s object based. The two immersive music formats are Atmos and Auro 3D. Atmos is of course object based, but Auro 3D is channel based. Nobody is doing DTS immersive music, based on what my contacts who mix and master this stuff say. 
 

Immersive to me involves layers beyond ear level, namely height channels. This is where the immersive comes from, being immersed in audio from all angles. 
 

Immersive seems to be settling in 7.1.4 12 channel systems, but others are definitely supported. 
 

I plan many more articles about all of this as you noted. Immersive brings many things to the table for both consumers and creators. Creators are now free from technology dictating what they do. They now have a 3D space in which to play music. Reproducing this as a consumer is great for all different types of music. Sure, a classical concert and recording all now expands to the ceiling. This is fantastic and an obvious use of the format. Others are using it more actively by placing audio everywhere initially. This means we can hear the reverb of sounds originating behind us, in the front channels. I have much more to say about this, and it may surprise people :~)

 

I think mixing engineers will finally get their due rather than mastering engineers getting all the press. Mixing in immersive makes or breaks a recording. 
 

Back to the water for me for now. I’m still digesting your full post. Great stuff. Keep it coming!

Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment

Thank you for mentioning the Berliner Philharmoniker's Digital Concert Hall app is available for Apple TV!  Should have realized, but just never thought of it.

One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein

Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature.

Link to comment
On 7/2/2022 at 9:37 PM, Kal Rubinson said:

All that is true for mainstream multichannel but several labels have, over the years introduced height channels.  I am thinking of Telarc, Chesky and MDG ("2+2+2"0.

Agreed except that the Qobuz app does not support any multichannel at this time and it is necessary to utilize Roon (are there others?) in order to hear those tracks in more than stereo.

Not if you have a Smyth Realiser on hand.

I think you did a great job.

Thanks very much Kal.

 

I wasn’t aware that labels such as the ones you mentioned added height channels to some of their MCH releases.

 

I have also used Audirvana to playback multichannel streams from Qobuz.

 

I also hadn’t heard of the Smyth Realiser. Will check it out.

Owner of: Sound Galleries, High-End Audio Dealer, Monaco

Link to comment
On 7/2/2022 at 10:59 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

Hi @Geoffrey Armstrong Great post. I’ll do my best to reply from the beach in Northern Minnesota (Independence Day holiday :~)). 
 

Immersive can’t be distinguished from traditional multichannel because it’s object based. The two immersive music formats are Atmos and Auro 3D. Atmos is of course object based, but Auro 3D is channel based. Nobody is doing DTS immersive music, based on what my contacts who mix and master this stuff say. 
 

Immersive to me involves layers beyond ear level, namely height channels. This is where the immersive comes from, being immersed in audio from all angles. 
 

Immersive seems to be settling in 7.1.4 12 channel systems, but others are definitely supported. 
 

I plan many more articles about all of this as you noted. Immersive brings many things to the table for both consumers and creators. Creators are now free from technology dictating what they do. They now have a 3D space in which to play music. Reproducing this as a consumer is great for all different types of music. Sure, a classical concert and recording all now expands to the ceiling. This is fantastic and an obvious use of the format. Others are using it more actively by placing audio everywhere initially. This means we can hear the reverb of sounds originating behind us, in the front channels. I have much more to say about this, and it may surprise people :~)

 

I think mixing engineers will finally get their due rather than mastering engineers getting all the press. Mixing in immersive makes or breaks a recording. 
 

Back to the water for me for now. I’m still digesting your full post. Great stuff. Keep it coming!

I attempted to respond from Marineland near Antibes, where we took our nine year old daughter over the weekend, and got up close and personal with some Dolphins 😀

 

Unfortunately my responses didn't go through, due to a poor internet connection.

 

So the differences between traditional multi-channel and "immersive" are not so clear cut as I'd thought. So I'll just continue to refer to the first as "traditional Multi-Channel" and the second as "Immersive".

 

I'm sure your new "Immersive" system also makes a superb "Traditional Multi-Channel" system and any comparisons between the two, you can make on your system, will be interesting to learn about.

 

I'm looking forward to your further articles.

Owner of: Sound Galleries, High-End Audio Dealer, Monaco

Link to comment
On 7/3/2022 at 4:49 PM, Jud said:

Thank you for mentioning the Berliner Philharmoniker's Digital Concert Hall app is available for Apple TV!  Should have realized, but just never thought of it.

 

IMHO it is a horrible experience on Apple TV with video. The camera changes every 2 -6 seconds. While the sound remains fixed in space the video jumps around constantly

 

here's the soloist for 5 seconds

jump to a closeup of a violinist for 2 seconds

jump to a wide angle of the conductor and orchestra for 3 seconds

back to the soloist for 4 seconds

camera slowly swoops in from the back of the orchestra until all you see is the conductor

closeup of the violins for a few seconds

closeup of the percussionist for a second

closeup of the flautist for 3 seconds

 

 

and on and on for an hour or more ???? no way in hell I can sit through that.. It is a HORRIBLE experience

 

 

 

 

 

see my system at Audiogon  https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/768

 

 

Link to comment

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...