Article: Atmos? We Don’t Need No Stinking Atmos

[Allan F]

Who needs two channel Atmos!?

[joelha]

3 minutes ago, Allan F said:

Who needs two channel Atmos!?

No one.

 

We also don't "need" high-end audio systems.

 

But we sure do enjoy them.

 

The title was for fun. The article explains the points I want to make.

 

Joel

[Fritsveer]

Many thanks for the article and file to check. Did compare tonight with wive next to me. She also confirmed the airiness of the atmos version ( wider sound stage). Sounds how I perceive an atmos recording via my AirPods Pro 2 ( although of course , it’s a different quality)
I want more of these 2.0 recordings ( have atmos able 5.1 set-up). I like the sound as well as the ability to use my higher end 2.0 system for these recordings. 

Any chance more 2.0 atmos recordings can be expected (preferably via streaming). As shown in the example it’s just a way of mixing and possible in high res. 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Fritsveer said:

Many thanks for the article and file to check. Did compare tonight with wive next to me. She also confirmed the airiness of the atmos version. Sounds how I perceive an atmos recording via my AirPods Pro 2 ( although of course , it’s a different quality)
I want more of these 2.0 recordings ( have atmos able 5.1 set-up). I like the sound as well as the ability to use my higher end 2.0 system for these recordings. 

Any chance more 2.0 atmos recordings can be expected? 
 

Every Atmos mix can be played on a two channel system. If you are specificaly talking about TrueHD Atmos albums, I currently have over 200 of them. There are many more available, with many more to come. 

[austinpop]

@joelha Thanks for a great, thought-provoking article. I have downloaded your sample, and plan to compare it these 2 versions I found on Qobuz:

• https://open.qobuz.com/track/229930149 in 24/192
• https://open.qobuz.com/track/229429495 in 24/44.1 

Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?" For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct? Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

 

I suspect I need education! @The Computer Audiophile can probably set me straight!

[joelha]

1 minute ago, austinpop said:

@joelha Thanks for a great, thought-provoking article. I have downloaded your sample, and plan to compare it these 2 versions I found on Qobuz:

• https://open.qobuz.com/track/229930149 in 24/192
• https://open.qobuz.com/track/229429495 in 24/44.1 

Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?" For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct? Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

 

I suspect I need education! @The Computer Audiophile can probably set me straight!

You're very welcome, austinpop.

 

And thanks for the comment.

 

As for what exactly goes into the creation of a 2-channel Atmos version, I'm going to, as you suggest, let Chris set you straight.

 

He's many times more knowledgeable about all things Atmos than I am.

 

I'll only say that, in the case of "A Shade of Blue", I have both the Atmos and DSD versions and I definitely prefer the Atmos version.

 

Joel

 

 

[bbosler]

18 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?"

exactly

 

I know this isn't right, but when I see ATMOS I think multiple channels, at least 5.1.2 and preferably more. That makes sense to me. Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

 

I'm not a purist as I have 9.4.6 Trinnov system and enjoy what it does when I apply Auro3D to most 5.1 SACD and DVD-A mixes as well as some stereo mixes, but I think they would have been better off sticking with calling it spatial audio for 2 channels and leave Atmos for multichannel. 

 

However, I'm with A'pop, , , , , willing to get educated

[The Computer Audiophile]

5 minutes ago, austinpop said:

Meanwhile, I am still struggling to understand what exactly an Atmos 2.0 mix is, and why we should not consider it a "downmix?"

 

For this Shade of Blue album, I am assuming that the Atmos mix and the 2ch stereo mix were both generated from the same edit master, correct?

 

Shouldn't the Atmos rendering to 2.0ch be very close to the 2ch mix, if the same mastering engineer generated both? And if they're not, is this an artifact of the Atmos rendering, rather than a deliberate difference?

 

 

 

Hi @austinpop all logical questions.

 

 

In the Atmos world, it's not really a downmix in the traditional sense, but rather a different rendering of the audio. In most Atmos mixes the engineer will make decisions that translate to some or all of the different rendering configurations. For example, the LFE channel isn't used much becuase this is thrown away in two channel mixes by the Atmos renderer. A traditional mix would use the LFE and downmix it into the front left and right often times. Another example, I was talking to an engineer making Atmos decisions about which objects to include in the mix that worked in all render configurations from two channel to sixteen. When listening back, it's easy to switch between the different renderings to make sure the music translates well. 

 

The Atmos mix in all rendering configurations is likely a different mix from the traditional stereo mix. 

 

The traditional two channel and the Atmos two channel cometimes can me very similar, but other times can be very different. It all depends on the mix. With the two channel Atmos, you still have the rendering process to place all the channels and objects. This is NOT as simple as a fold down or downmix, there is a lot of math involved and grouping of objects for the best quality or smallest file size etc... It's a totally different world from something like a 5.1/7.1 downmix to 2.0.

 

[Allan F]

2 hours ago, joelha said:

The title was for fun.

As was my post. 🙂

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, bbosler said:

I know this isn't right, but when I see ATMOS I think multiple channels, at least 5.1.2 and preferably more. That makes sense to me. Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

 

Most of us aren't right :~)

 

The gimmick is traidional stereo. Squeezing everything into two speakers with limited tools for the past 60 years. Like drinking concentrate.

 

 

4 minutes ago, bbosler said:

I'm not a purist as I have 9.4.6 Trinnov system and enjoy what it does when I apply Auro3D to most 5.1 SACD and DVD-A mixes as well as some stereo mixes, but I think they would have been better off sticking with calling it spatial audio for 2 channels and leave Atmos for multichannel. 

 

The beauty of Atmos is a sinlge name and single file for all configurations. No need to know anything, just play the music. 

[joelha]

3 minutes ago, bbosler said:

Adding something to a 2 channel mix to make it seem bigger (sorry if not an exact term) seems to me to be not much different than the "gimmicks" we got in the 70's with things like the Phase Linear ambience generators and other such gizmos.

bbosler,

 

As you say you're not a purist, I'm not sure how you could draw a conclusion without hearing the product first.

 

I would no more have an opinion of your Trinnov system until I had heard it.

 

How many developments would we miss in this hobby if we discounted what we were going to hear before we heard it?

 

I hope you'll give the download a shot and let us know what you think.

 

Joel

[bbosler]

32 minutes ago, joelha said:

As you say you're not a purist, I'm not sure how you could draw a conclusion without hearing the product first.

 

fair enough

 

Given I have thousands of recordings including mono, stereo, 4.0 , 5.0, 5.1, Auro3D and various versions of multichannel Atmos in TrueHD, I doubt I ever try 2 channel Atmos since I have reached my saturation point in trying new formats, and I can easily just listen to it in the multichannel version........ but your point is well taken

 

 

[bobfa]

I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

 

You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

 

https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

 

 

Back to my COVID fog,...

 

If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

12 minutes ago, bobfa said:

I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

 

You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

 

https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

 

 

Back to my COVID fog,...

 

If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

 

 

Get better soon Bob. 

[STC]

3 hours ago, bobfa said:

I want to highlight the difference between two mixes done decades apart on the same music.  To hear this, you need Apple Music and an Apple Device.  The second version is in ATMOS, but Apple will bring it down to 2-channel for anything you are playing to.

 

You can skip over the first two tracks for this test.  Just listen to Carly Simon's "You're So Vain"

 

https://music.apple.com/us/playlist/bobfa-atmos-vs-non-atmos/pl.u-BNA66l6tp4DNb

 

 

Back to my COVID fog,...

 

If the engineers keep improving things like this for me, maybe I no longer need an 8tb music library and the management overhead,....??  

 

 

Get well soon! Bob.

 

Back to the topic, I tried with AirPod Pro Gen 2, the remastered version have some enhancement to the highs. I prefer the original version and Not hearing much difference with ATMOS enabled or not that would immediately be noticed if enjoying music is the top priority. Am I missing something?

 

5 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

The traditional two channel and the Atmos two channel cometimes can me very similar, but other times can be very different.

Can there be two channel ATMOS? Headphones and AirPods are exempted. I am not keeping up with ATMOS technology but it is always my understanding is that you need at least 4 speakers for the object audio to work.

[joelha]

10 minutes ago, STC said:

Can there be two channel ATMOS? Headphones and AirPods are exempted. I am not keeping up with ATMOS technology but it is always my understanding is that you need at least 4 speakers for the object audio to work.

Yes, there is 2-channel Atmos. 

 

That's why I've offered the one minute download in my post. 

 

It is a 2-channel Atmos track and, assuming you have a Qobuz or Tidal subscription, will allow you to make a good comparison between it and a traditional stereo recording. 

 

Please give it a try. 

 

Joel

[STC]

10 minutes ago, joelha said:

Yes, there is 2-channel Atmos. 

 

That's why I've offered the one minute download in my post. 

 

It is a 2-channel Atmos track and, assuming you have a Qobuz or Tidal subscription, will allow you to make a good comparison between it and a traditional stereo recording. 

 

Please give it a try. 

 

Joel

Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 
 

For Tidal “ You can stream music in Dolby Atmos on your Dolby Atmos compatible soundbars, TVs, AVRs, in addition to your iOS and Android compatible devices. For a full list of compatible devices, visit our support page.“

 

and for Apple products “

If you choose Automatic, here’s what you'll need

Supported songs will play in Dolby Atmos automatically when you're listening using:

Any Apple or Beats Bluetooth headphones

If you’re using headphones that support Spatial Audio with dynamic head tracking, you’ll need to turn on Spatial Audio in Control Centre.

The built-in speakers on an iPhone XS or later (except iPhone SE), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd generation or later), iPad Pro 11-inch or iPad Air (4th generation or later)”

 

You cannot produce ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones or AirPods and that too only if they are ATMOS compatible.

[joelha]

6 minutes ago, STC said:

Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 

You can tell me it's not possible or you can give the download a try.

 

I've been happily listening to 2-channel Atmos on two non-Atmos speakers for weeks now.

 

I wouldn't devoted the time to my article (nor would Chris have agreed to post it on the homepage of his site) if playing 2-channel Atmos on two (non-Atmos) speakers was impossible.

 

Please let me know your experience after you listen to the file.

 

Joel

[bbosler]

Yet your article states that the $400 decoding software is a requirement 

 

 

[joelha]

3 minutes ago, bbosler said:

Yet your article states that the $400 decoding software is a requirement 

Correct. That's to create your own 2-channel version of the Atmos MKV file. 

 

However, once someone has completed the conversion, the resulting file can be played without the decoding software. 

 

Joel

[STC]

33 minutes ago, joelha said:

You can tell me it's not possible or you can give the download a try.

 

I've been happily listening to 2-channel Atmos on two non-Atmos speakers for weeks now.

 

I wouldn't devoted the time to my article (nor would Chris have agreed to post it on the homepage of his site) if playing 2-channel Atmos on two (non-Atmos) speakers was impossible.

 

Please let me know your experience after you listen to the file.

 

Joel

I didn’t comment much earlier because I was confused and thought I misunderstood the topic.

 

Speakers got nothing to do with ATMOS. What matters is, the minimum number of speakers required to render ATMOS correctly. ATMOS is based on panning sound between speakers to position them in space. That’s what stereo does but it is limited since it is channel based. I guess, it works with your system and Chris but I am still stuck with the basics and still fascinated with Bravia Acoustic Surface speakers playing ATMOS or with the iPads with 4 speakers.

 

Here is the video explaining ATMOS.

 

 

[bobfa]

46 minutes ago, STC said:

Joel, I don’t think that is possible to play Dolby ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones compatible with. You need devices that are Dolby ATMOS enabled. 
 

For Tidal “ You can stream music in Dolby Atmos on your Dolby Atmos compatible soundbars, TVs, AVRs, in addition to your iOS and Android compatible devices. For a full list of compatible devices, visit our support page.“

 

and for Apple products “

If you choose Automatic, here’s what you'll need

Supported songs will play in Dolby Atmos automatically when you're listening using:

Any Apple or Beats Bluetooth headphones

If you’re using headphones that support Spatial Audio with dynamic head tracking, you’ll need to turn on Spatial Audio in Control Centre.

The built-in speakers on an iPhone XS or later (except iPhone SE), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd generation or later), iPad Pro 11-inch or iPad Air (4th generation or later)”

 

You cannot produce ATMOS with two speakers with the exception to headphones or AirPods and that too only if they are ATMOS compatible.

 

Let’s talk about Apple Spatial Audio ATMOS for the moment.

 

Apple decodes ATMOS streams in all of their music playback hardware.  You can put a 2-channel DAC on a Mac with no issues. (Or and ipad or an iPhone)  I have done it with multiple devices and several DACs  This JUST WORKS and I am pretty sure that Apple is still the only one to do this on desktop hardware.

 

For Dolby TrueHD

 

You need to use Dolby Software the Dolby Reference Player to decode the files.  @The Computer Audiophile has outlined this elsewhere.  We create rendered ATMOS files in virtually any speaker configuration from 2-channel up.  SO I have 7.1.4 WAV files right out of the player.

 

 

 

 

[joelha]

4 minutes ago, STC said:

What matters is, the minimum number of speakers required to render ATMOS correctly.

Two speakers will do it.

 

However, if you don't want to try my uploaded file on your system and are happy with the sound you're getting then enjoy. 

 

Joel

[STC]

6 minutes ago, bobfa said:

 

Let’s talk about Apple Spatial Audio ATMOS for the moment.

 

Apple decodes ATMOS streams in all of their music playback hardware.  You can put a 2-channel DAC on a Mac with no issues. (Or and ipad or an iPhone)  I have done it with multiple devices and several DACs  This JUST WORKS and I am pretty sure that Apple is still the only one to do this on desktop hardware.

 

For Dolby TrueHD

 

You need to use Dolby Software the Dolby Reference Player to decode the files.  @The Computer Audiophile has outlined this elsewhere.  We create rendered ATMOS files in virtually any speaker configuration from 2-channel up.  SO I have 7.1.4 WAV files right out of the player.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, joelha said:

Two speakers will do it.

 

However, if you don't want to try my uploaded file on your system and are happy with the sound you're getting then enjoy. 

 

Joel

 

Even if you put one speaker sound will come out. That doesn’t mean proper ATMOS rendering. IT will sound different. With music since most sound is within the front channels so you may sense something different and probably better since it is decongested. 
 

I have been quietly following the ATMOS topic and the more I read about two speakers ATMOS, I am confused further and made my first comment here because this is NOT what ATMOS meant to be. You need at least 4 speakers for the decoder to place the sound. In the absence of other speakers it is like listening to 5.1 with two speakers. Yes, it will sound different but sound meant rest of the 3 speakers are not produced. If you have downsampling to 2 then you are essentially hearing stereo with different mixing.

 

Is there a software where it says Dolby ATMOS downsample for 2.0 or 2.1?

[bbosler]

Ok, I downloaded it and compared to the Qobuz version

 

the Atmos track has a slightly wider soundstage, it has a much louder bass line and the drum (snare ?) is louder and further to the right . 
 

The Atmos bass line is louder and tubbier and drum louder to the point they are no longer accompanying the piano, they are the featured instruments as if it is their turn to solo

 

The non Atmos version is much preferred…, to my ear on my 2 channel only system

 

I also have the mkv Atmos download I compared on my Trinnov system. Completely different system so inconclusive, but soundstage is bigger as would be expected. The balance of instruments is closer to the Qobuz and preferred over the 2 channel Atmos.