Article: Embracing Immersive Audio

[The Computer Audiophile]

View full article

[Archimago]

Well said Chris!

 

Atmos (and multichannel) is very much an "undiscovered country" by many audiophiles still which is a shame because I think we audiophiles should be the ones who are most open-minded about the potential of new technologies and ways to reproduce a "more real" sound in our rooms. (And at the same time, educated enough to be critical of nonsense like MQA when we have to.)

 

I find it ironic that magazines like Stereophile would prefer to stifle innovation and creativity by somehow suggesting that audiophiles should be locked in the 2-channel mindset (based on their recent article). As if the typical dynamically compressed CD version or hi-res 2-channel download/stream in any way represents the ideal "absolute sound". As if dragging the stylus over plastic is the epitome of best sound quality for ever and ever, amen!

 

Times are changing. I love your story about your daughter wanting to hear Atmos in your system. My 16 year old as well... She's happy to listen to stereo over her laptop and headphones. But when it comes to the definitive experience of Taylor's Version, it's downstairs on the multichannel system she seeks out. (Plus she's happy we got some tickets for Swift next year when she comes to Vancouver - the real "live" but not hi-fi experience. 🙂)

[JoeWhip]

I heartedly agree with Chris and Arch. When done right, Atmos music adds a sense of realism that 2 channel simply can’t match. Then you add the brain cell eating ability to add 4K video and movies, it is a win win across the board. Sone of the folks at Stereophile must never have heard a well set up hone Atmos system. Their loss not mine.

[Sal1950]

Good article on immersive audio Chris.

Archimago hits the nail on the head with his post.

Sadly, Stereophile has actively pursued a anti-surround music path for decades. That was highlighted in 2002 by the original founder and owner J. Gordon Holt leaving its ranks when the new boss John Atkinson refused to allow him to write about surround sound. We had the excellent run of Kal Rubinson's "In The Round" articles but sadly they are also gone.

A magazine that is supposedly interested in bringing the news of SOTA audio to it's readers has instead taken different paths. They would rather continue to support MQA after the audio community at large had rejected it, exposing it's lies and deceitful practices.

It would be so simple and honest for them to take the same position everyone did with lossy 2ch streaming and encourage a change to lossless Atmos, instead they stated,  "We should hope for its demise"!  What is this agenda they have? Maybe the time has come that Stereophile has outlived it's value to high end audio enthusiasts around the world and we should "hope for it's demise".  ;)

 

As a side note Stereophile's main competitor in High End Audio,  "The Absolute Sound", has been dipping it's toes in Atmos music with some music reviews, etc; and in the Oct 2023, the magazines "Editor In Chief" Robert Harley wrote a great 8 page article on the building of his new Home Theater/Music Room.

 

Some eyes are being opened.

The futures so bright, I gotta wear shades

[mandrix]

I love Atmos and hope it's here to stay.

In the early 70's I went full on Quad, about the time I picked up a Stereophile subscription. After a few years I dropped it, then picked it up back again in the 80's then dropped it again.

I will not make that mistake again. Multichannel is not on their minds, really never has been to any great extent, IIRC. Yes, there is one person that believes in the mch formats but by and large the mag seems stuck with people intent on denigrating anything not stereo. I don't get it, but no longer care as I've moved on with a 7.1.4 Atmos system.

[fas42]

Downunder there is close to zero interest, still. The two major retailers in my state only mention it in the context of the "other" audio experience - home theatre. And the major website that is based in our part of the world, Stereonet, only mentions Atmos in passing, in the posts ...

 

So, if it's going to make the Big Time it's a slow start, for us. Whether it "sounds real", rather than just gimmicky, in a less than fully optimised, and expensive rig is the other question mark - I haven't come across anything live or on the net yet that shows signs of getting this reasonably good ...

[fas42]

And this article, https://www.afr.com/technology/true-surround-sound-technology-for-music-is-here-but-there-s-a-catch-20230828-p5dzvl, from a local reputable journal screams at me what the problem still is: the focus, how it's presented, is all about gimmickry, in what you hear ...

[The Computer Audiophile]

12 minutes ago, fas42 said:

And this article, https://www.afr.com/technology/true-surround-sound-technology-for-music-is-here-but-there-s-a-catch-20230828-p5dzvl, from a local reputable journal screams at me what the problem still is: the focus, how it's presented, is all about gimmickry, in what you hear ...

This is part of the human problem. Who you’re listening to is a writer who visited Dolby labs rather someone, me, who has spent over 2,000 hours listening to all genres, talking with those who create it, and spending time in the studios. 
 

You decide who’s more credible. 

[bobfa]

The magazine's title is Stereo---phile, which says it all. I am sure that, along with advertising money, this drives the culture in many ways. I have heard the same old tropes echoed in many other OLD locations. However, one of them started listening to Apple Music and Apple AirPods Pro 2, which tickled his brain a bit—my Hope Springs Eternal.

 

I do not ever see myself going back to 2-channel only. Much more to come! 😁

[JoeWhip]

I will continue to write about Atmos and stereo but really spend no time at all trying to get folks into 2 channel anymore but instead encouraging folks to give immersive audio a try. Immersive is the future.

[fas42]

26 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

This is part of the human problem. Who you’re listening to is a writer who visited Dolby labs rather someone, me, who has spent over 2,000 hours listening to all genres, talking with those who create it, and spending time in the studios. 
 

You decide who’s more credible. 

 

I'm sure that your own listening space for immersive is of a high order. Because you've gone to the effort, taken the care, to "get it right". But if articles which are intended to enthuse potential buyers of new audio directions - and the readers of this journal are the 'serious' members of the community - send the message that it's all about fireworks and razzle dazzle, then it's highly likely that these people will settle back down with their carefully considered stereo setups, and think, "It's just another fad ..."

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, fas42 said:

 

I'm sure that your own listening space for immersive is of a high order. Because you've gone to the effort, taken the care, to "get it right". But if articles which are intended to enthuse potential buyers of new audio directions - and the readers of this journal are the 'serious' members of the community - send the message that it's all about fireworks and razzle dazzle, then it's highly likely that these people will settle back down with their carefully considered stereo setups, and think, "It's just another fad ..."

 

I was talking about what you think, not what others think. You said ...

 

50 minutes ago, fas42 said:

the problem still is: the focus, how it's presented, is all about gimmickry, in what you hear

 

[fas42]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I was talking about what you think, not what others think. You said ...

 

 

Perhaps you misunderstood. I was talking of the fact that media coverage, etc, is about the Wow! factor of hearing Atmos. Which is less likely to encourage serious consideration of surround sound systems, by those with the money and interest to do it properly.

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, fas42 said:

 

Perhaps you misunderstood. I was talking of the fact that media coverage, etc, is about the Wow! factor of hearing Atmos. Which is less likely to encourage serious consideration of surround sound systems, by those with the money and interest to do it properly.

I did misunderstand. I thought that was your take on it :~)

 

My fault. 

[Sal1950]

I got my December issue of The Absolute Sound yesterday. Continuing their coverage of options for SOTA surround  sound was a review of the Audiopraise PRO HDMI Extractor box. For folks that worry over possible clocking issues with the multichannel HDMI interface and wishing to use ultra high quality external DAC's, this may be of interest. Chris I think your already doing something along these lines, as is member @Kal Rubinson .  Maybe a good piece for a AS review..

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Maybe a good piece for a AS review

Almost two years ago :~)

 

 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

Chris C said, <quote>"What is an option, and has been THE option for audiophiles since the beginning of time, is accepting what the mass market selects and perfecting it. Shaking our fists, yelling at clouds, telling kids to get off our lawns, and hoping for something better is another way to go about it, but I’ll go with the much more enjoyable audiophile style of music reproduction. " </quote>

 

I can't say I agree that audiophiles have ever "accepted" mass market selections and that is despite evangelistic attempts by some to persuade us we can't really hear the difference anyway, you know, if we're really honest, oh dear, lol. 

 

I also can't agree that we have "perfected" playback of what was poor quality source material in the recording (although there is at least one eminent AS member that extols such magic endeavors with his well sorted rig 🙄).

 

My impression is that audiophiles have chosen different paths when dealing with the inevitable shortcomings of recordings (or shortcomings of distributed media). Some focus on the music and not the gear, some listen through the bad bits (pun intended) to enjoy what a high fidelity system can do with the good bits, and some tend to color the presentation to their overall liking or by adding wow factors. I think however, its a fair point that Atmos is a different playback method entirely to stereo that can render music differently and potentially for the better in the ears of the beholder.

 

I am not doubting that for some Atmos has opened up a whole new world of musical pleasure to experience and that is a wonderful thing. I still suspect it will be a hard sell for many audiophiles. I don't think it is necessary to get all tribal about it - us against them, (and IMO credit to Chris C who has not done this) .

 

I will of course totally reserve judgement until I have had a chance to really listen, which is my old school way of assessing music. Its commercial success will likely depend on other things entirely. Time will tell if it is embraced or not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Groot Geluid]

On 11/17/2023 at 1:14 AM, bobfa said:

The magazine's title is Stereo---phile, which says it all. I am sure that, along with advertising money, this drives the culture in many ways. I have heard the same old tropes echoed in many other OLD locations. However, one of them started listening to Apple Music and Apple AirPods Pro 2, which tickled his brain a bit—my Hope Springs Eternal.

 

I do not ever see myself going back to 2-channel only. Much more to come! 😁

It is a misconception that stereo means (in audio also) 2 channel. It describes the spacial aspect. Stereo sound (meaning spatial sound) can be achieved from 2 sources to many more.....

One of the main aspects of sound qualitiy, namely tonal accuracy, is vastly improved by surround set  ups with more than 2 loudspeakers, if the recorded material is made with the playback situation in mind. After more than 40 years in audio and music recording it is clear to me that even among people who enjoy music listening also for the sound aspect of it, they are mostly unaware what is possible and not really trying to achieve it.

[fas42]

I note that "spatial stereo" is now "a thing", actively promoted by companies. And on looking it up found these comments,

 

Quote

There have been stereo upmixing techniques since for ever. Nothing has yet beaten proper stereo sound for music.

 

and

 

Quote

Fully agreed. I listened to a lot of Atmos music today. 90% I’d describe as “airy vocals with all other sounds pushed to the background”, 5% as “stereo but with some sounds gimmicky going from left to right” and 5% (mainly classical) where Atmos actually created a superior feel of space in the music.

 

The former I agree with wholeheartedly. The latter is a bit disquieting, because it implies that the gimmicky side of things is still too prominent in the minds of producers of the recordings.

[The Computer Audiophile]

7 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I note that "spatial stereo" is now "a thing", actively promoted by companies. And on looking it up found these comments,

 

 

and

 

 

The former I agree with wholeheartedly. The latter is a bit disquieting, because it implies that the gimmicky side of things is still too prominent in the minds of producers of the recordings.

 

I read it on the internet, it must be true.

 

- Abraham Lincoln

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I note that "spatial stereo" is now "a thing", actively promoted by companies. And on looking it up found these comments,

 

 

and

 

 

The former I agree with wholeheartedly. The latter is a bit disquieting, because it implies that the gimmicky side of things is still too prominent in the minds of producers of the recordings.

 

Again, perhaps I don't understnad what you're trying to say, but I've spent over 2,000 hours listening and I disagree with whomever said what you quoted.

[JoeWhip]

Fas42 lives in some alternate reality with his high end boombox.

[fas42]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Again, perhaps I don't understnad what you're trying to say, but I've spent over 2,000 hours listening and I disagree with whomever said what you quoted.

 

Really all I'm saying is that I suspect I will have a similar viewpoint to the second comment - unless I hear only those recordings which have been carefully engineered enough, on a setup which is 'faultless' in the ways I am sensitive to, then I will be too aware of the rig trying to impress me, rather than just deliver a musical experience.

 

No alternate reality here, . There are enough setups out there now which are accurate enough to deliver the goods, which I point to now and again in my video clips blog thread. This is the sort of thing I was looking for, and getting, decades ago - the interesting aspect is understanding why most rigs fail, and what is needed to make it happen ...

[The Computer Audiophile]

13 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Really all I'm saying is that I suspect I will have a similar viewpoint to the second comment - unless I hear only those recordings which have been carefully engineered enough, on a setup which is 'faultless' in the ways I am sensitive to, then I will be too aware of the rig trying to impress me, rather than just deliver a musical experience.

 

No alternate reality here, . There are enough setups out there now which are accurate enough to deliver the goods, which I point to now and again in my video clips blog thread. This is the sort of thing I was looking for, and getting, decades ago - the interesting aspect is understanding why most rigs fail, and what is needed to make it happen ...

In other words, you know what you want to believe and you’ll seek information to back it up. 

[fas42]

13 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

In other words, you know what you want to believe and you’ll seek information to back it up. 

 

Which implies I have an agenda, to demonstrate that surround sound is "not good enough". Which I don't. What I'm seeing so far, is that one has to be exposed to the "best examples" of Atmos, to see "what the fuss is about". If I come across an example of some album I know well, that is significantly improved in the presentation by being in Atmos, then I can cheerfully tick the Yes box, . If a recording was designed from the start to be a surround sound experience then it's almost inevitable that reverting to stereo will lose a lot of its impact - but for albums created before the adoption of this technology I will have a question mark until I hear tracks that show otherwise ...