Article: Embracing Immersive Audio

[fas42]

I just thought of an example of what would be fascinating, in Atmos: what is like being a musician, sitting in the middle of an orchestra, playing some major symphonic work?  Having the perspective of that person, what he experiences, would be really nifty to hear - and would be well worth going to the effort to record and hear through playback.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I just thought of an example of what would be fascinating, in Atmos: what is like being a musician, sitting in the middle of an orchestra, playing some major symphonic work?  Having the perspective of that person, what he experiences, would be really nifty to hear - and would be well worth going to the effort to record and hear through playback.

This would be really neat. Or the ability for the mix to move based on wherever a person selected. First chair violin vs percussion vs conductor vs 10 rows back in the middle. 

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

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

 

Confirmation bias is alive and well, for sure. What intrigues me is that most (I suspect all) see what we look for and find what we know and/or recognize.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

12 hours ago, Groot Geluid said:

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.

 

 We know timing issues are important for tonal accuracy so curious as to the reasoning or documentation for "tonal accuracy is vastly improved by surround setups" ?

[Confused]

Just for information, this is what Frank is referring to:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/nuw28m/psa_ios_15_supports_a_new_feature_called/

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 hours ago, Confused said:

Just for information, this is what Frank is referring to:

 

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/nuw28m/psa_ios_15_supports_a_new_feature_called/

 

Ah, thank you for that. That’s quite a longitudinal study, I can see why Frank is using it as a major data point, NOT 😳

[fas42]

Nicely caught, Confused. Which got me another thread, just now,

 

 

And that continues the theme ... . I come, currently, from the angle of this chap,

 

Quote

I like atmos for movies, but I LOVE two-channel for music. Set up properly you can nearly achieve a 3D effect. To me, music sounds coming from all angles could be a fun novelty, but I doubt it will ever replace stereo, for me at least.

 

Except, the 3D effect is not a "nearly" - when this standard of reproduction switches on, fully, any interest in something more Wow! evaporates ...

 

I'm happy to be next to the stage where the musicians are performing; actually going onto the stage, being in the middle of them, would be interesting - but I don't see it as being life changing.

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

Nicely caught, Confused. Which got me another thread, just now,

 

 

And that continues the theme ... . I come, currently, from the angle of this chap,

 

 

Except, the 3D effect is not a "nearly" - when this standard of reproduction switches on, fully, any interest in something more Wow! evaporates ...

 

I'm happy to be next to the stage where the musicians are performing; actually going onto the stage, being in the middle of them, would be interesting - but I don't see it as being life changing.

 

So many opinions from people with so little experience and knowledge in the area. 

[fas42]

As I mentioned a while ago to Confused, this track would be a "go to" for me, to check whether a rig was up to it - I referred to it often, when first getting good replay,

 

 

Most stereo setups turn this into a congealed mess, when everything climbs on board - if an Atmos setup can render this super clean, at solid, elevated volumes, then I would give it a big thumbs up ...

[JoeWhip]

I have heard these arguments from fellow audiophiles. The thing is, when you go to a concert hall, you are not getting a 2 channel experience but an immersive one. But, what do I know.

[The Computer Audiophile]

31 minutes ago, fas42 said:

As I mentioned a while ago to Confused, this track would be a "go to" for me, to check whether a rig was up to it - I referred to it often, when first getting good replay,

 

 

Most stereo setups turn this into a congealed mess, when everything climbs on board - if an Atmos setup can render this super clean, at solid, elevated volumes, then I would give it a big thumbs up ...

I have it in TrueHD Atmos. It's amazing. Nothing can reproduce this album like Atmos. 

 

 

[Jud]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I'm happy to be next to the stage where the musicians are performing; actually going onto the stage, being in the middle of them, would be interesting - but I don't see it as being life changing.

 

This person has obviously not been lucky enough to sit on a stage 10 feet from a Van Cliburn winner, twice. Maybe not life changing, but "interesting" doesn't cover it at all.

 

Edit: Note the quote function makes it seem like Chris said this, but in fact he was quoting someone else.

 

 

[fas42]

32 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

This person has obviously not been lucky enough to sit on a stage 10 feet from a Van Cliburn winner, twice. Maybe not life changing, but "interesting" doesn't cover it at all.

 

 

 

Well, I have "been lucky enough" to sit a couple of feet away from a classical guitar player with a major catalogue of recordings to his name, as he effortlessly "fooled around" with his instrument while conversing with people sitting with him ... yes, special stuff - but most music is when performed by someone "practiced in the art" ... or reproduced well, .

[Sal1950]

I got the email from Stereophile today that the As We See It editorial from the Dec2023 issue has gone public.

Jim Austin's nonsense "As We See It" attack on Apple music's streaming of Atmos music went public today.
I had steam coming out of my ears when I read it a week for so back. The bottom line being because of Apples
choice to stream Atmos in a lossy form, he choose to call for "Atmos" demise.

"For those of us who care about perfectionist audio, Atmos, as conceived by record-company executives, is not the answer. We should hope for its demise."

https://www.stereophile.com/content/beatles-last-stand

For decades we tolerated 2ch being streamed in various lossy forms till the pressure from us (those who cared) grew
loud enough that most all streamers now offer lossless options. But instead of calling for Apple (and the other Atmos streamers) to upgrade to a lossless form, he instead calls for it's (Atmos) demise. Just another example of Mr Austin pursuing an agenda that is in some way financially motivated rather than putting audios current SOTA multich sound delivery codec at the top of it's priories. Exactly the same as his continued support for MQA.  I have posted this response there.

"Rather than wish for a SOTA quality lossless Atmos stream as we did for many years with 2ch, Mr Austin wishes for its demise.
What I would wish for is Mr Austin's position at the helm of Stereophile to have it's demise and someone more akin to J. Gordon Holt to once again take the reins, he was a man with a deep understanding and appreciation for multich music production. Mr Austins view of SOTA audio is way too narrow minded for this job."

 

 

[JoeWhip]

Had to chime in again there. What utter tosh by Mr. Austin. Makes me embarrassed to be an audiophile.

[fas42]

I keep my eye out for a single, yes, single, video on YouTube that captures what it sounds like in a room that has good quality Atmos playback running - yes, plenty of Whiz Bang stuff, but nothing that one would want live with for more than 10 minutes.

 

You know how people can capture some live music happening somewhere, on a very amateurish mobile clip, and one thing that shines through it the quality of 'realness' of what is going on? Well, if Atmos done well is up to it, then at least something of that same quality should be evident in a rough and ready capture of what it "sounds like" - otherwise, I don't see the point. So far, I haven't chanced on a video done to demonstrate this - so, if someone could point me to one, I would appreciate it ...

[The Computer Audiophile]

35 minutes ago, fas42 said:

I keep my eye out for a single, yes, single, video on YouTube

You could’ve stopped right there. Ridiculous quality that’s barely stereo, and you judge 12 channel Atmos. Just stop with the cockamamie comments. 

[One and a half]

On 11/22/2023 at 7:13 AM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

So many opinions from people with so little experience and knowledge in the area. 

Opinions are what they are, whether you agree or not is another issue. That could mean the message on Dolby Atmos is not getting through. 

[Jud]

On 11/21/2023 at 2:43 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

So many opinions from people with so little experience and knowledge in the area. 

 

Seriously.

 

This is like people objecting to offering more camera angles on a sporting event. Don't have those additional angles in 4K yet? So what, you will eventually as technology moves forward.

 

Day before yesterday only mp3s were being streamed. Yesterday it was Redbook. Today it's hi res.

 

Today lossy immersive is being streamed. Tomorrow.... And the day after that....

[fas42]

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You could’ve stopped right there. Ridiculous quality that’s barely stereo, and you judge 12 channel Atmos. Just stop with the cockamamie comments. 

 

I'm not judging a system whether I can discern 12 channels of sound. What I would be judging is whether the integrity of the playback chains used for those channels are good enough, so that if I listen with just one ear - or alternatively with the microphone of some recording device - at some, random position, then the SQ has no major defects or obvious problems. If the replay has distinct issues, sufficient to be obvious on a video clip, then all the Wowness! of other aspects won't count for a can of beans, in the long term.

 

Interestingly, I was just down in the big shopping area of my area for the first time in a good while ... was that one 'serious' audio concern still going? Nope - had died. How about the mega size retailer of everything, especially electronics, who had a decent room set aside for the "good stuff", last time - well, that space was no more, swamped by a sea of mega size screens that stretched into the distance, with colours pumping at maximum heat ... it's visual, maaan ... that's where the action is!

 

Not inspiring, not one little bit ... whether Atmos can reach to be taken seriously is very much a question mark, in my neck of the woods.

[The Computer Audiophile]

19 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

I'm not judging a system whether I can discern 12 channels of sound. What I would be judging is whether the integrity of the playback chains used for those channels are good enough, so that if I listen with just one ear - or alternatively with the microphone of some recording device - at some, random position, then the SQ has no major defects or obvious problems. If the replay has distinct issues, sufficient to be obvious on a video clip, then all the Wowness! of other aspects won't count for a can of beans, in the long term.

 

Interestingly, I was just down in the big shopping area of my area for the first time in a good while ... was that one 'serious' audio concern still going? Nope - had died. How about the mega size retailer of everything, especially electronics, who had a decent room set aside for the "good stuff", last time - well, that space was no more, swamped by a sea of mega size screens that stretched into the distance, with colours pumping at maximum heat ... it's visual, maaan ... that's where the action is!

 

Not inspiring, not one little bit ... whether Atmos can reach to be taken seriously is very much a question mark, in my neck of the woods.

I don’t take the results of your longitudinal study seriously. 

[Archimago]

Again, nice topic Chris and appreciate your first-hand experience and your no-nonsense leadership on this topic.

 

As per my comments on that Stereophile As We See It, I agree with @Sal1950, what a load of fuming nonsense! Indeed, that magazine needs someone at the helm with the courage to have some vision to nudge audiophiles and the industry towards a progressive direction.

 

Here's my take this weekend: MUSINGS: Beyond "High Resolution" recordings. Into "Immersive" and "High Reality" content.

 

With nonsense like MQA gone, maybe it's a good time for audiophiles to think about the future and evaluate the direction that will expand this hobby, improve the music production quality, open creative freedom for artists we love, and pave the way for hardware progress that can extract the best from these recordings.

 

Happy Thanksgiving weekend to the American friends...

[fas42]

2 hours ago, Archimago said:

Here's my take this weekend: MUSINGS: Beyond "High Resolution" recordings. Into "Immersive" and "High Reality" content.

 

 

Your stance is, unfortunately, why I will keep pushing my agenda - a key thing you said,

 

Quote

The issue with standard 2-channel stereo is that it's simply not natural.

 

That demonstrates that you have never heard a 2 channel system projecting a convincing illusion, or if you have, you thought it was a gimmick, a fluke, or a by-product of some type of distortion, e.g. "tube warmness". It's none of those, but simply a natural consequence of the playback having low enough levels of certain types of distortion or anomalies - the fact that the latter is not plug and play keeps that standard of presentation at bay for most participants; which is not a reason to try and force the concept of it being possible to "just go away!!"

 

Why I want to hear a clip of decent Atmos playback happening is to check whether the technology is at least good enough to "sound right" - every instance of surround sound I've come across in the flesh, and the ones that are captured in clips all do the set to 11! thing - equivalent to the rows and rows of monster TV sets all throbbing with Super! colour, with excess paint running down down the fronts of the glass, I saw a day or so ago ... great for a thrill ride - but do I want to live with it ... ?

 

Natural means, natural. Reality should just be reality ... not "High Reality".

[The Computer Audiophile]

11 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Your stance is, unfortunately, why I will keep pushing my agenda - a key thing you said,

 

 

That demonstrates that you have never heard a 2 channel system projecting a convincing illusion, or if you have, you thought it was a gimmick, a fluke, or a by-product of some type of distortion, e.g. "tube warmness". It's none of those, but simply a natural consequence of the playback having low enough levels of certain types of distortion or anomalies - the fact that the latter is not plug and play keeps that standard of presentation at bay for most participants; which is not a reason to try and force the concept of it being possible to "just go away!!"

 

Why I want to hear a clip of decent Atmos playback happening is to check whether the technology is at least good enough to "sound right" - every instance of surround sound I've come across in the flesh, and the ones that are captured in clips all do the set to 11! thing - equivalent to the rows and rows of monster TV sets all throbbing with Super! colour, with excess paint running down down the fronts of the glass, I saw a day or so ago ... great for a thrill ride - but do I want to live with it ... ?

 

Natural means, natural. Reality should just be reality ... not "High Reality".

You’re still on that magical mystery tour. 

[ted_b]

There are so many emotions (some, yes, quite negative) going through my head right now after reading these few dozen posts!!  I think I'll bite my lip and simply state that unless you've heard a properly calibrated Atmos setup (say, 5.1.4 or above...7.x.6 being a nice bubble) you shouldn't be able to present an opinion on how it sounds !!  And proper setup is no small feat, but not overwhelming either.  But like anything, if you want it to work, you gotta sweat the details.  You wouldn't present a stereo system with two very different speakers representing left and right.  And if possible, you'd try for balanced positioning, etc.  Same for additional dimensions, with the height dimension often being "thrown in late".  Don't fall into that trap then think Atmos is gimmicky. 

 

But, I do have a strong opinion about nomenclature; using the terms "immersive" or "spatial" is a good direction to go.  HOWEVER, I am pleading we don't fall into the "3D" trap.  It connotates fakery, or at least weird "wear these glasses" compromises.  In the video world I'm not sure anyone would call it a retail success.  Let's stay away from 3D please.  :)