Article: Embracing Immersive Audio

[fas42]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

You’re still on that magical mystery tour. 

 

You see, I just have to turn on my ultra cheap rig, quite reasonably optimised over the time I've had it, and turn up the volume - as I did about an hour ago, after quite a few days not using it - sound stage away in the distance, almost invisible speakers, firing beautifully. Pipe and drums band, then a classic blues compilation, happening as I type - spot on from the other end of the house; in the room where it's playing the CD, the band's powering, filling every inch of the space with that driving beat, and feel ... would Atmos add one tiny bit to that? ... Nope!!

 

It's a tour I'm happy to take, indefinitely ... .

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 minutes ago, fas42 said:

would Atmos add one tiny bit to that? ... Nope!!

 

 

Frank, there is nothing in this world, inclusive of illegal substances, that'll improve the world you're living in. Cheers for being so content, but the quote about remaining silent and be thought a fool, vs speaking up and removing all doubt, is coming into play with respect to Atmos. You personally are certianly no fool, but your immersive audio comments are quite silly and come from a place of zero experience. 

[fas42]

37 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

Frank, there is nothing in this world, inclusive of illegal substances, that'll improve the world you're living in. Cheers for being so content, but the quote about remaining silent and be thought a fool, vs speaking up and removing all doubt, is coming into play with respect to Atmos. You personally are certianly no fool, but your immersive audio comments are quite silly and come from a place of zero experience. 

 

Not quite zero ... the recent audio show had a home theatre room with Atmos logos prominently shown, with surround speakers in play; working competently at levels probably 20dB higher that anyone here has had Atmos working at home. Yes, impressive stuff - but showing shortfalls in SQ, as mentioned elsewhere ... I'm on the lookout for what it might sound like, when all the stars align; but so far have come across nothing.

 

I was just perusing WhatsBestForum, to see what the interest is like there ... very mild, from what I can see - Mike Lavigne, who pushes 2 channel quite a ways, sees a place for it - but not for the great archive of music going back decades.

 

I note that Joe Whip, in a separate thread there, mentions "sense of scale and dynamics" for orchestral being hard with 2 channel ... yes, but that's purely limitations in the hardware used ... an Atmos version could add some authentic 'bounce' from the hall's surfaces, but I see that as the only benefit.

[ARQuint]

On 11/21/2023 at 4:43 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

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

 

I think that a key observation here is that assessments of Dolby Atmos should be based on experience, and not just experience with Dolby Atmos. The metric of "immersion" is just one aspect of what gives spatiality to a recording: Dr. Edgar Choueiri has written a feature for TAS on this subject for the January 2024 issue that I hope everyone will read and digest. But even just limiting the discussion to immersive mixes, it's not as if this phenomenon began with Atmos. Discreet loudspeaker-based multichannel has given us thousands of albums, which I've collected enthusiastically for a decade and a half (more than 4000 on a 52TB NAS.). I don't get the impression that many Dolby Atmos enthusiasts have much experience with this mother-lode of material.

 

I had an excellent Atmos demo from Joe Whip—we're friends, and don't live that far apart—and I resolved to update my 5.1 Magico/Pass MC system to an Atmos-capable one, trading my Anthem D2v for an Anthem AVM70 and adding a pair of Magico A1s for height channels. I resolved not to form any opinions until I'd had meaningful experience with the unfamiliar format. This is my conclusion so far.

 

Unfortunately, here's a real quality gap with Atmos for music. There are not all that many music-only Dolby TrueHD discs and downloads to listen to. Among those that are available, most (but not all) of mine come from 2L and they are among the very best immersive-style spatial audio mixes I've ever heard. What's streamed on Apple Music has little to do with that—it's egregiously compressed and sounds it when compared to the available stereo versions available on Tidal, Qobuz, etc. In addition, decisions regarding the mix itself for an Atmos release—which sounds go where— are, in my experience, usually inferior to those that were made for the equivalent SACD, Blu-ray, or download. That's my opinion, based on the small number of albums that are both available as disc or download and can be streamed as Dolby Digital Plus.

 

Finally, how many Atmos enthusiasts have heard Choueiri's BACCH-SP XTC filter in action? It's responsible, of course, for a different kind of  advanced spatiality than Atmos (or speaker-based multichannel) but it more often than not serves the musical meaning of a performance exceptionally well. Two-channel devotees are not necessarily Luddites if they decline to embrace Atmos as the future of high end audio.

 

Andy Quint

[El Guapo]

On 11/24/2023 at 10:44 AM, Jud said:

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

KoSwing, one of Taiwan's finest big band jazz, plan to have live shows with realtime, lossless immersive audio streaming over internet for subscribers next year. 😊

[ted_b]

1 hour ago, ARQuint said:

 

 

 

Unfortunately, here's a real quality gap with Atmos for music. There are not all that many music-only Dolby TrueHD discs and downloads to listen to. Among those that are available, most (but not all) of mine come from 2L and they are among the very best immersive-style spatial audio mixes I've ever heard. What's streamed on Apple Music has little to do with that—it's egregiously compressed and sounds it when compared to the available stereo versions available on Tidal, Qobuz, etc. In addition, decisions regarding the mix itself for an Atmos release—which sounds go where— are, in my experience, usually inferior to those that were made for the equivalent SACD, Blu-ray, or download. That's my opinion, based on the small number of albums that are both available as disc or download and can be streamed as Dolby Digital Plus.

 

 

 

Andy Quint

?  There are hundreds of Atmos releases!  And the "which sounds go where" instructions are not inferior, they are the same.  The ADM files, sent to the streamers and sent to the sources for the TrueHD distribution (bluray or download) are from the same instruction set, just one is processed in DD+ (compressed) and the other isn't. 

[JoeWhip]

I played some TrueHD Atmos and some Atmos from Apple Music for a touring rock guitarist at my home on Thanksgiving. He was shocked by what he heard. He loved it. One convert at a time.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

think that a key observation here is that assessments of Dolby Atmos should be based on experience, and not just experience with Dolby Atmos. The metric of "immersion" is just one aspect of what gives spatiality to a recording: Dr. Edgar Choueiri has written a feature for TAS on this subject for the January 2024 issue that I hope everyone will read and digest. But even just limiting the discussion to immersive mixes, it's not as if this phenomenon began with Atmos. Discreet loudspeaker-based multichannel has given us thousands of albums, which I've collected enthusiastically for a decade and a half (more than 4000 on a 52TB NAS.). I don't get the impression that many Dolby Atmos enthusiasts have much experience with this mother-lode of material.

The market has selected Atmos. Focusing on Atmos is what I think is the best move. If we don’t, we end up like red headed stepchildren with DSD again. With respect to the multichannel made years ago, that ship has sailed. To me it’s like vintage gear. Nobody is still selling it, finding the old stuff is hard, and the market has already moved on. It may be fun for some people, but I’m very uninterested. 
 

Immersive = height channels. 
 

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

What's streamed on Apple Music has little to do with that—it's egregiously compressed and sounds it when compared to the available stereo versions available on Tidal, Qobuz, etc

It makes no sense to compare a football to a tractor. They don’t even attempt to do the same things. 
 

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

Finally, how many Atmos enthusiasts have heard Choueiri's BACCH-SP XTC filter in action? It's responsible, of course, for a different kind of  advanced spatiality than Atmos (or speaker-based multichannel) but it more often than not serves the musical meaning of a performance exceptionally well. Two-channel devotees are not necessarily Luddites if they decline to embrace Atmos as the future of high end audio.

Edgar’s technology is neat, but has nothing to do with accurate playback of source material. It’s like hitting the Stadium button on old receivers. Cool effect, but not related to what’s on the album. Two channel mixes are done on speakers and headphones, to sound like they do on speakers are headphones like the mixing engineer. Nobody mixes using Edgar’s tech. Thus, using it for playback is essentially like adjusting bass and treble. It may be enjoyable, but nothing related to fidelity. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

There are not all that many music-only Dolby TrueHD discs and downloads to listen to.

The format has been around for 30 minutes. The number of mainstream albums being released in TrueHD today is far greater than the number of mainstream albums being released as multichannel SACD or downloads. 

[bbosler]

5 hours ago, fas42 said:

it's playing the CD, the band's powering, filling every inch of the space with that driving beat, and feel ... would Atmos add one tiny bit to that? ... Nope!!

 

so you are capable of discerning what something will be like without having to experience it.

 

No wasting time for you !! No need to try things to find out if you like them. You just know !!

 

Most people would claim nobody is capable of doing that, but I believe you. I envy you. 

 

[ARQuint]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Edgar’s technology is neat, but has nothing to do with accurate playback of source material. It’s like hitting the Stadium button on old receivers. Cool effect, but not related to what’s on the album. Two channel mixes are done on speakers and headphones, to sound like they do on speakers are headphones like the mixing engineer. Nobody mixes using Edgar’s tech. Thus, using it for playback is essentially like adjusting bass and treble. It may be enjoyable, but nothing related to fidelity. 

 

This is, I think, an unfair characterization of XTC, as developed by Edgar or anyone else. This isn't an "effect," something akin to pushing an ambiance button on a receiver, but the recovery of spatial information that was there all along. Again, it's a different kind of spatial information than the purely immersive variety, but restoring it to a two-channel recording—probably 80% of all stereo recordings I have, not just binaural productions—greatly increases dimensional detail.

 

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The market has selected Atmos. Focusing on Atmos is what I think is the best move. If we don’t, we end up like red headed stepchildren with DSD again. With respect to the multichannel made years ago, that ship has sailed. To me it’s like vintage gear. Nobody is still selling it, finding the old stuff is hard, and the market has already moved on. It may be fun for some people, but I’m very uninterested. 
 

I'm not suggesting that fans of immersive audio look for long out-of-print multichannel SACDs. Rather, I'm asking Dolby Atmos content producers to consistently put more effort into creating their immersive mixes, which can seem pleasantly enveloping at first (and distract you from the glaring deficiencies with basic audio parameters that derive from the heavy compression of the streamed version) but don't always hold up over time. This is especially the case with classical music.

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The format has been around for 30 minutes. The number of mainstream albums being released in TrueHD today is far greater than the number of mainstream albums being released as multichannel SACD or downloads. 

Is this really true, Chris? How many discs with Dolby TrueHD music-only content are available at the current time? I think most audiophiles understand that physical media and downloads may well be going the way of the dodo before long. Otherwise, it's streaming and, as you say, the market has spoken with the powers- that-be deciding that an extremely lossy format is good enough for most.

[JoeWhip]

I have had conversations with folks at Dolby involved with Atmos. They are pushing the labels to release TrueHD Atmos discs as they fully realize how much better they sound than DD+. Hopefully we will see more. Besides the DD+ v. trueHD issue. I have found the physical media conundrum. One of my favorite mixes still is the Bob James Feels like making live album. Downloaded from Immersive Audio Album in a MKV file, it sounds sensational. Until I grabbed the 4k ultra HD Blu ray release. The physical media sounds better in every way,. Maybe it is the player v. The Nvidia Shield, who knows, but give us more physical media. Are you listening Don Was?

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

This is, I think, an unfair characterization of XTC, as developed by Edgar or anyone else. This isn't an "effect," something akin to pushing an ambiance button on a receiver, but the recovery of spatial information that was there all along. Again, it's a different kind of spatial information than the purely immersive variety, but restoring it to a two-channel recording—probably 80% of all stereo recordings I have, not just binaural productions—greatly increases dimensional detail.

I view it as an effect because “nobody” has ever created an album using this in the studio while mixing the record. The music was never meant to sound like it does through this process. It’s a huge change to the sound that consumers make. Absolutely nothing wrong with it, but it isn’t high fidelity. 

I hope Edgar’s products are hugely successful and people enjoy them. We should have as many choices as we want. This one just isn’t for me. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, ARQuint said:

I'm not suggesting that fans of immersive audio look for long out-of-print multichannel SACDs. Rather, I'm asking Dolby Atmos content producers to consistently put more effort into creating their immersive mixes, which can seem pleasantly enveloping at first (and distract you from the glaring deficiencies with basic audio parameters that derive from the heavy compression of the streamed version) but don't always hold up over time. This is especially the case with classical music.

This is the classic audiophile point of view, leaving total enjoyment just out of reach. It’s masochistic. 
 

You could say what you said about any format. Artistic decisions don’t always jibe with audiophile pursuits. We should hope for something better of course, but we should accept the real world and try to make it sound as good as possible. 

[JoeWhip]

Atmos is rather new on tge screen for music The engineers will get better and better using it and the mixes will get better and better, just like Morten at 2L and Ulricke Schwartz.

[ARQuint]

6 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

I have had conversations with folks at Dolby involved with Atmos. They are pushing the labels to release TrueHD Atmos discs as they fully realize how much better they sound than DD+. Hopefully we will see more. Besides the DD+ v. trueHD issue. I have found the physical media conundrum. One of my favorite mixes still is the Bob James Feels like making live album. Downloaded from Immersive Audio Album in a MKV file, it sounds sensational. Until I grabbed the 4k ultra HD Blu ray release. The physical media sounds better in every way,. Maybe it is the player v. The Nvidia Shield, who knows, but give us more physical media. Are you listening Don Was?

 

Last week I received a couple of TrueHD classical albums I'd ordered from Pure Audio Recordings in Germany, both performances I was familiar with from other formats: Destination Rachmaninov (Trifonov/Philadelphia/Nézet-Séguin) and Franck etc organ music played by Olivier Latry. Both were magnificent—spatially, tonally, dynamically. I was able to compare the Latry recording to the hybrid MC SACD and the Atmos Mix won that face off handily – having those height channels goes a long way in sonically illuminating a very large space like a cathedral. I couldn't compare the TrueHD and DD+ versions  as the Apple TV Atmos files are not up on Apple TV now. I'm pretty sure that they were when I ordered the discs a few weeks back, but I believe Apple TV may rotate some selections on and off their playlist.

 

All by way of emphasizing that I fully appreciate what Atmos can do when given the chance. Unlike the folks that wrote the Stereophile editorial, I don't want Atmos to go away, I want it to get better.

 

Joe, let me know when Dave Was returns your call.

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Artistic decisions don’t always jibe with audiophile pursuits. We should hope for something better of course, but we should accept the real world and try to make it sound as good as possible. 

You seem to be implying that using the DD+ format for streaming Atmos is an "artistic decision." It isn't, of course - it's a economic/financial one.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, ARQuint said:

You seem to be implying that using the DD+ format for streaming Atmos is an "artistic decision." It isn't, of course - it's a economic/financial one.

Nope, just responding to your comment stating:

 

 

 

7 hours ago, ARQuint said:

I'm not suggesting that fans of immersive audio look for long out-of-print multichannel SACDs. Rather, I'm asking Dolby Atmos content producers to consistently put more effort into creating their immersive mixes, which can seem pleasantly enveloping at first (and distract you from the glaring deficiencies with basic audio parameters that derive from the heavy compression of the streamed version) but don't always hold up over time. This is especially the case with classical music.

 

Atmos content producers putting in more effort is a strange way to put whatever it is you’re trying to say. 

[JoeWhip]

I thought Dave Was had me on speed dial or at least his Rolodex. 😎

[Sal1950]

On 11/25/2023 at 2:22 PM, Archimago said:

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.

Thanks Archi and others for your support!

Stereo music presentation was a wonderful invention for bringing some dimensionality  to our listening experience. Great recording artists and engineering teams use the 2 channels in the same way a great painting artist uses brush strokes, oil thickness, light & shadow and color to add dimension to what otherwise would be a flat canvas.

Multich and Atmos especially uses it's tools to bring another paradigm to recorded music. Instead of just peering thru that "open window into the concert hall", immersive uses this new technology in the way that Michelangelo brought his vision to the Sistine Chapel.  Walking into that room, rather than just staring at a small canvas brings a whole new experience to painting artistry, Multich-Atmos offers the same toolkits to music artists. Yes, you do have to accept this new presentation paradigm, it is completely different. But for me I always felt it took a big exciting step forward in the presentation of a musical event.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

52 minutes ago, Sal1950 said:

Thanks Archi and others for your support!

Stereo music presentation was a wonderful invention for bringing some dimensionality  to our listening experience. Great recording artists and engineering teams use the 2 channels in the same way a great painting artist uses brush strokes, oil thickness, light & shadow and color to add dimension to what otherwise would be a flat canvas.

Multich and Atmos especially uses it's tools to bring another paradigm to recorded music. Instead of just peering thru that "open window into the concert hall", immersive uses this new technology in the way that Michelangelo brought his vision to the Sistine Chapel.  Walking into that room, rather than just staring at a small canvas brings a whole new experience to painting artistry, Multich-Atmos offers the same toolkits to music artists. Yes, you do have to accept this new presentation paradigm, it is completely different. But for me I always felt it took a big exciting step forward in the presentation of a musical event.

 

Agree 100%

 

Perfect choice of a photo to tell your story as well. 

[fas42]

16 hours ago, bbosler said:

 

so you are capable of discerning what something will be like without having to experience it.

 

No wasting time for you !! No need to try things to find out if you like them. You just know !!

 

Most people would claim nobody is capable of doing that, but I believe you. I envy you. 

 

 

For me, the point is that an audio system is merely a means for connecting to the musical events captured on recordings - it's tool for doing that, and no more. If a system does that effortlessly, at any sane volume level I choose, on any album I care to put on, then it's done its job - until very recently, essentially all audio setups just downright failed at doing that; it was like looking at a girl with makeup caked on, who was trying to look attractive - but only succeeded in making one uncomfortable, because it was all too obvious ...

 

It's fine to have a hobby of trying "new things", or exploring alternate methods to enhance the experience; but the fundamentals have to be in place first - for me. Does the system handle any sort of recording without making it obvious that "something is not right" ... check 👍. Does the playback place me "in the room" where the action is - which I call 'immersive' - the "I'm there!" sensation ... check 👍.

 

I would be very interested in hearing a competent Atmos playback - but the odds are not good: retailers here are only interested in the home theatre thing - and I heard such a setup quite superior to what they would do, only weeks ago - which failed the 'transparency' test. And there is not the slightest hint that anyone has a home system in my region that meets the standard that say Chris would state is required ...

 

The word I use over and over again is "convincing" - hard to do but certainly achievable - until a surround rig I come across nails that, I'll be happy with 2 channels that gets all the important stuff right.

 

[fas42]

I'll give another example of what a system that "does its job" achieves ... you put on an album by a group who you have never heard of before, or an album by a known band that put out a 'dud' - the recording went nowhere, the tracks almost instantly disappeared into the archives. And it works. Beautifully. You get, on the first listen what the musicians were trying to do, aiming for - plenty of Wow! moments while you listen - what a "discovery"!! This is the thrill that having top notch replay delivers - the magic of finding "new stuff" ... not for me the tedium of playing "audiophile approved" tracks for the umpteenth time, to see if I can hear when the drummer dropped a stick "more clearly than ever before!", .

[Jud]

8 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

I thought Dave Was had me on speed dial or at least his Rolodex. 😎

 

Dave may, but I think it's Don you're looking for. 😉

[JoeWhip]

Duh, I am dumb. I will contact him immediately.

[firedog]

19 hours ago, JoeWhip said:

I have had conversations with folks at Dolby involved with Atmos. They are pushing the labels to release TrueHD Atmos discs as they fully realize how much better they sound than DD+. Hopefully we will see more. Besides the DD+ v. trueHD issue. I have found the physical media conundrum. One of my favorite mixes still is the Bob James Feels like making live album. Downloaded from Immersive Audio Album in a MKV file, it sounds sensational. Until I grabbed the 4k ultra HD Blu ray release. The physical media sounds better in every way,. Maybe it is the player v. The Nvidia Shield, who knows, but give us more physical media. Are you listening Don Was?

Why can't they just release the TrueHD as a download?