I've had Penteo on my Radar for some time now while I use Halo up mix daily. I mix in Dolby Atmos as well as 5.1 and 7.1. I just completed a project with Penteo 16 demo with "Phase On" setting and I was VERY impressed. I love this up mixer and will be employing this daily and only wish I demoed it sooner!
Why so many formats? Because it’s the industry standard! Avid has now added 12 Dolby Atmos formats (up to 9.1.6) into Pro Tools matching the Atmos formats Penteo's upmixer has supported for years. It’s a great validation that all Atmos formats are the plugin rule, not the exception, actually.
Totally agree on the excessive output channel configurations for these channel upmixing plugins. You wouldn't generally need to upmix beyond 7.1.2 bed unless you are actually delivering only channel-based playback files for Atmos, but that's not really a sharable format other than in the studios. In principle it's not hard to create a Dolby Atmos ADM from scratch so it woud be worth $700 if it upmixed to an ADM you can then import into your DAW session.
Great video as always! I had a question, I'm about to purchase the Pro + version with the goal of up-mixing from a Stereo file. The end product is for Apple Spatial Audio - My question is what should my output setting be within the plugin? (7.1.2? 7.1.4?) I'm mixing on headphones and selecting binaural mode in the plugin settings. I 'm trying to create binaural masters, but not sure which output setting to use. My Cubase renderer output is set to binaural, just not sure about the plugin output! Thanks
Apple spatial audio uses Atmos. The most straightforward way would be to upscale to an Atmos bed in 7.1.2. But the best approach would be to do a full Atmos remix.
(EDIT: Reading further down in the comments, I see you touched on why 7.1.2 as the production standard vs 7.1.4, essentially answering: "Think object placement in 3D, not object placement in any given speaker layout." Proper volume calculations for the spread of an object among speakers can expand and contract the virtual surround geometry per object as necessary to place the object anywhere within and beyond the imagined fixed geometry of the speaker layout, whether 7.1.2, 7.1.4, 9.2.6, etc.) ..... I'm really curious as to why 7.1.4 isn't the production standard. Though I've invested in Fiedler and Sound Particles software platforms, I haven't yet invested in a surround monitoring setup, which I currently plan to be 7.1.4. Therefore, I have no real physical experience of 7.1.2 vs 7.1.4, but it seems that elevated motion would be served better with better height and space dimension with four elevated speakers rather than two, and would thus give better reference and flexibility during production. Please let me know what the logic and feel is for 7.1.2 being the production standard rather than 7.1.4. Is it because 7.1.2 is generally less expensive, and potentially then more widely used?
Dolby Atmos is a fairly old technology. I think this is basically a legacy issue. 7.1.2 used to be the best compromise to ensure full backwards compatibility. You can work around that by using objects for the missing overheads.
it seems like a better deal then Nugen Upmix , as you get a downmixer to any format included (binaural too) and it does HOA . but the main audience seems to be the people who needs to convert from various formats to Atmos .
Hi Michael, Could we achieve the same result with an ambisonic(3rd order) encoder and then an ambisonic decoder? I'm thinking of Audio Brewers plugins (ab encoder and ab decoder) What do you think ? THANKS
Good question. It's usually better to use a native multichannel reverb instead of upmixing a stereo one. And if you want to upmix, a solution such as Halo Upmix is the better choice. This plugin is primarily used for format conversions. It would not turn your stereo reverb into a full immersive one.
I am a bit confused about why you say 7.1.2 is the standard when every studio and producer i know is using a 7.1.4 minimum speaker setup and mixing to 7.1.4 delivery to the film and music companies. As we have talked about earlier i am needing to go to 9.1.6 due to the size of my Atmos studio and i can't understand why any producer would mix on 7.1.2 as the two height channels are just not enough to give you the full spatial audio result.. It would be like record producers trying to mix stereo music on mono speaker system? the results would be just pure guess work lol Please correct me if i am barking up the wrong tree here Michael as i respect and your views very highly and learn so much from your videos.. I am only starting out on this dolby Atmos journey and still trying to get to grips with it :-) And everything i know about it i learn from producers who are doing dolby atmos on a dailey basis and great content creators like your self.
Your comment points to an issue that is one of the most confusing for many people. I initially struggled with that myself. In Atmos you do not think in terms of speaker layouts, only in terms of object positions. The fact that Dolby decided to limit beds to 7.1.2 is very unfortunate because it is confusing for exactly the reasons you are describing. I might do a full video on that issue.
@@michaelgwagner Thanks Michael i think that would be a great video and it does seem strange that dolby would limit the bed to 7.1.2 when most big studios and producers i know are running min 7.1.4 or even 9.1.6 setups.. As you say a think a video about this would be great and also maybe include the various daws ie cubase and nuendo only allowing 7.1.4 speaker output configuration unlike the full dolby suite which does not have this limit.. I wonder if there is away to actually setup a work around the output limitations in Steinberg Software. Best Wishes in 2023
@@QFXmusic Dolby limit the bed to 7.1.2 and it will always be limited to those two central height speakers because if you are mixing for a film/theater you want the audience in the front to hear the same overhead audio as those in the back. This is why the bed traditionally carries everything static in a movie, it's only moving sound (objects with xyz metadata) that need a wider format. That's the official reasoning from Dolby. It's bascially to ensure the audience all hear the same overhead audio regardless of seating position, which is exactly the same case with the Central front speaker. That's there so the audience on left hear the same dialogue as those on the right because a cinema seating is wider than the phantom centre dialogue sweetspot provides with only Left & Right speakers.
@@SamHocking Thanks Sam for this reply :-) Makes Sense for theatre but not so much for music production :-) I suppose this only gets rendered down to 7.1.2 if its the theatre ? And not for music streaming services...
@@QFXmusic Well Dolby Atmos isn't designed for music really, more just Dolby finding other markets beyond film. The 7.1.2 bed scales up to a full theatre overheads because it's not object-based. Everything in the .2 height will come out of all height speakers front to back at the same level because the bed is only channel-based, the decoder has no sense of where the sound is in an XY position, just that it all goes above the audience and so to all overhead speakers configured to be overheads. Several Atmos music engineers don't use the bed at all other than for LFE, they'll only use objects and perhaps an object bed where the emulate a custom bed, perhaps of 6.0.6 and then those xyz object points will matrix up or down to whatever user speaker format as that's what the objects are designed to do.
I am sure people mentioned it: it’s pEnteo ; ) but otherwise a fantastic and informative video, like always! Although this concerns two other videos you made previously in regards to headphone mixing: I would love to have some input from you concerning mixing for film, more precisely, cinematic releases: most of your mentioned plugins do not include professional mix stages (like Warner, Skywalker Sound, …) and while being able to work towards music production with before mentioned solutions, the cinema and its workflow limits Dolby Atmos to home theatre, you will need to go to a professional and costly mix stage which have a Dolby certified setup and a license and hardware to render final mixes for theatrical releases. For independent film makers this is almost not possible considering the prices and even if, the mix should be as close to done as possible to spend as little time as possible on a mix stage. I think you didn’t mention New Audio Technology Spatial Sound Designer software which includes a couple of cinema rooms. I would love to have your take on that topic. Keep on doing what you are doing, you produce fantastic and to the point content for us!
When using Penteo can you please explain why someone would leave the LFE off for music? Can you also explain if you have it turned off and someone is listening in a Dolby Atmos room if lower frequencies will still pass through the listeners subwoofer if you have the LFE turned off in Penteo? Thanks! P.S. This might be a great idea for a RUclips video. There’s lots of confusion surrounding LFE when doing Atmos mixes for music. There’s very little concrete Information out there. A video explaining how the LFE will translate in a music mix for consumers listening on a system that actually has all these channels in their home would be awesome!
Thanks for the interesting video 👍 It's a shame that RUclips's content ID procedure has struck. I claim that the "stupid" AI was wrong again. 😉. My advice, always object to ominous copyright complaints. So far I have been able to successfully ward off all copyright complaints and the number of complaints was already in the 2-digit range. 😊 Unfortunately, the plugins presented are simply too expensive for a casual amateur in relation to their performance. 😢
Unless something has changed in the past month or so, the Nugen's channel layout is not configurable, , so, for example, it does not work properly in Logic. Did not try it in PT yet. Penteo is great overall but have to agree with you about the UX/UI . . .
You can re-matrix VST outputs in a host plugin like Bidule, Element etc. Not ideal as it's a plugin within a plugin then, but then upmix is generally set and forget sort of plugin really.
I would mostle need a thing like this plugin for mixing between say Quad and Atmos or a cube (4 channels in low speaker (quad) and four channels in eleveted speakers) to a Atmos config. This is becouse doing panning in atmos is kind of hard in Max Msp so a cube is much easier to achive..
Very good question. There is also a third option, which is Sound Particles Space Controller Studio as a third option. I think it depends on your application. Each one of them has its particular strengths and weaknesses. Currently, I lean towards 3DX.
They check the ADM contains object stems and binaural metadata but I know for a fact they accept upmixes as I've worked on them, but I guess they would reject just a straight stereo to 7.1.2 bed upmix like Halo or Penteo.
@@iamyila I'm not 100%, but the big giveaway an Atmos mix is Stereo upmix, is the Atmos stereo folddown will sound almost identical to the Stereo version. From ADMs i've seen the engineers are generally a bit more clever and will use perhaps 50-100 objects and be a bit more creative.
What I keep asking myself is apart from in cinemas where are people going to hear these atmos mixes? Only on earbuds from streaming? It seems like a very convoluted way to basically end up with a binaural mix, or am I missing something here’s I pretty much only mix music and I’m just not getting where this is going, can you clarify this as to what is trying to be achieved here? If quad, 5.1 surround failed how will this succeed?
We will see. One thing that is different now is that some earbuds or headphones (in particular AirPods) have integrated headtracking. So it is no longer limited to a binaural downmix, it is potentially a full Atmos experience you can get through those.
The point of atmos is it is scalable. So yeah most people are hearing a binaural mix, the difference is if you have an atmos setup you can use the exact same mix. Unlike 5.1 and 7.1 which need specific mixes for that format. This means that say a phone speaker, a headphones, a 3.1 soundbar, a 7.1.2 consumer soundbar based atmos, a studio and a cinema can all have the same mix. Of course it isn't perfect but if you currently watch atmos tv and movies it definately adds to the experience regardless (for example I watch Disney+ on headphones with dolby access and have seen some of those movies in an atmos theatre and both sound great and better than stereo). I am loving some of the pop mixes atm in atmos on amazon music just binaurally, if I ever get a proper atmos setup I can enjoy those same mixes through that setup.
I've had Penteo on my Radar for some time now while I use Halo up mix daily. I mix in Dolby Atmos as well as 5.1 and 7.1. I just completed a project with Penteo 16 demo with "Phase On" setting and I was VERY impressed. I love this up mixer and will be employing this daily and only wish I demoed it sooner!
Why so many formats? Because it’s the industry standard!
Avid has now added 12 Dolby Atmos formats (up to 9.1.6) into Pro Tools matching the Atmos formats Penteo's upmixer has supported for years.
It’s a great validation that all Atmos formats are the plugin rule, not the exception, actually.
Totally agree on the excessive output channel configurations for these channel upmixing plugins. You wouldn't generally need to upmix beyond 7.1.2 bed unless you are actually delivering only channel-based playback files for Atmos, but that's not really a sharable format other than in the studios. In principle it's not hard to create a Dolby Atmos ADM from scratch so it woud be worth $700 if it upmixed to an ADM you can then import into your DAW session.
Great video as always! I had a question, I'm about to purchase the Pro + version with the goal of up-mixing from a Stereo file. The end product is for Apple Spatial Audio - My question is what should my output setting be within the plugin? (7.1.2? 7.1.4?) I'm mixing on headphones and selecting binaural mode in the plugin settings. I 'm trying to create binaural masters, but not sure which output setting to use. My Cubase renderer output is set to binaural, just not sure about the plugin output! Thanks
Apple spatial audio uses Atmos. The most straightforward way would be to upscale to an Atmos bed in 7.1.2. But the best approach would be to do a full Atmos remix.
(EDIT: Reading further down in the comments, I see you touched on why 7.1.2 as the production standard vs 7.1.4, essentially answering: "Think object placement in 3D, not object placement in any given speaker layout." Proper volume calculations for the spread of an object among speakers can expand and contract the virtual surround geometry per object as necessary to place the object anywhere within and beyond the imagined fixed geometry of the speaker layout, whether 7.1.2, 7.1.4, 9.2.6, etc.) ..... I'm really curious as to why 7.1.4 isn't the production standard. Though I've invested in Fiedler and Sound Particles software platforms, I haven't yet invested in a surround monitoring setup, which I currently plan to be 7.1.4. Therefore, I have no real physical experience of 7.1.2 vs 7.1.4, but it seems that elevated motion would be served better with better height and space dimension with four elevated speakers rather than two, and would thus give better reference and flexibility during production. Please let me know what the logic and feel is for 7.1.2 being the production standard rather than 7.1.4. Is it because 7.1.2 is generally less expensive, and potentially then more widely used?
Dolby Atmos is a fairly old technology. I think this is basically a legacy issue. 7.1.2 used to be the best compromise to ensure full backwards compatibility. You can work around that by using objects for the missing overheads.
it seems like a better deal then Nugen Upmix , as you get a downmixer to any format included (binaural too) and it does HOA .
but the main audience seems to be the people who needs to convert from various formats to Atmos .
It does not really upmix like Nugen. It’s more straightforward format conversion.
Hi Michael, Could we achieve the same result with an ambisonic(3rd order) encoder and then an ambisonic decoder? I'm thinking of Audio Brewers plugins (ab encoder and ab decoder)
What do you think ? THANKS
I doubt it because that would not really upscale. The new Audio Brewers upscaler might work though.
Would you recommend using this to upmix reverb that’s stereo only or is there any reason to avoid that?
Good question. It's usually better to use a native multichannel reverb instead of upmixing a stereo one. And if you want to upmix, a solution such as Halo Upmix is the better choice. This plugin is primarily used for format conversions. It would not turn your stereo reverb into a full immersive one.
Interesting product. It is probable that a bunch ofsimilar tools will be arriving over the next year
I agree
I am a bit confused about why you say 7.1.2 is the standard when every studio and producer i know is using a 7.1.4 minimum speaker setup and mixing to 7.1.4 delivery to the film and music companies. As we have talked about earlier i am needing to go to 9.1.6 due to the size of my Atmos studio and i can't understand why any producer would mix on 7.1.2 as the two height channels are just not enough to give you the full spatial audio result.. It would be like record producers trying to mix stereo music on mono speaker system? the results would be just pure guess work lol Please correct me if i am barking up the wrong tree here Michael as i respect and your views very highly and learn so much from your videos.. I am only starting out on this dolby Atmos journey and still trying to get to grips with it :-) And everything i know about it i learn from producers who are doing dolby atmos on a dailey basis and great content creators like your self.
Your comment points to an issue that is one of the most confusing for many people. I initially struggled with that myself. In Atmos you do not think in terms of speaker layouts, only in terms of object positions. The fact that Dolby decided to limit beds to 7.1.2 is very unfortunate because it is confusing for exactly the reasons you are describing. I might do a full video on that issue.
@@michaelgwagner Thanks Michael i think that would be a great video and it does seem strange that dolby would limit the bed to 7.1.2 when most big studios and producers i know are running min 7.1.4 or even 9.1.6 setups.. As you say a think a video about this would be great and also maybe include the various daws ie cubase and nuendo only allowing 7.1.4 speaker output configuration unlike the full dolby suite which does not have this limit.. I wonder if there is away to actually setup a work around the output limitations in Steinberg Software. Best Wishes in 2023
@@QFXmusic Dolby limit the bed to 7.1.2 and it will always be limited to those two central height speakers because if you are mixing for a film/theater you want the audience in the front to hear the same overhead audio as those in the back. This is why the bed traditionally carries everything static in a movie, it's only moving sound (objects with xyz metadata) that need a wider format. That's the official reasoning from Dolby. It's bascially to ensure the audience all hear the same overhead audio regardless of seating position, which is exactly the same case with the Central front speaker. That's there so the audience on left hear the same dialogue as those on the right because a cinema seating is wider than the phantom centre dialogue sweetspot provides with only Left & Right speakers.
@@SamHocking Thanks Sam for this reply :-) Makes Sense for theatre but not so much for music production :-) I suppose this only gets rendered down to 7.1.2 if its the theatre ? And not for music streaming services...
@@QFXmusic Well Dolby Atmos isn't designed for music really, more just Dolby finding other markets beyond film. The 7.1.2 bed scales up to a full theatre overheads because it's not object-based. Everything in the .2 height will come out of all height speakers front to back at the same level because the bed is only channel-based, the decoder has no sense of where the sound is in an XY position, just that it all goes above the audience and so to all overhead speakers configured to be overheads.
Several Atmos music engineers don't use the bed at all other than for LFE, they'll only use objects and perhaps an object bed where the emulate a custom bed, perhaps of 6.0.6 and then those xyz object points will matrix up or down to whatever user speaker format as that's what the objects are designed to do.
It's very useful
I am sure people mentioned it: it’s pEnteo ; ) but otherwise a fantastic and informative video, like always! Although this concerns two other videos you made previously in regards to headphone mixing: I would love to have some input from you concerning mixing for film, more precisely, cinematic releases: most of your mentioned plugins do not include professional mix stages (like Warner, Skywalker Sound, …) and while being able to work towards music production with before mentioned solutions, the cinema and its workflow limits Dolby Atmos to home theatre, you will need to go to a professional and costly mix stage which have a Dolby certified setup and a license and hardware to render final mixes for theatrical releases. For independent film makers this is almost not possible considering the prices and even if, the mix should be as close to done as possible to spend as little time as possible on a mix stage. I think you didn’t mention New Audio Technology Spatial Sound Designer software which includes a couple of cinema rooms. I would love to have your take on that topic. Keep on doing what you are doing, you produce fantastic and to the point content for us!
Ah, thanks for the correction. I‘ll correct the thumb as soon as I get the chance.
When using Penteo can you please explain why someone would leave the LFE off for music? Can you also explain if you have it turned off and someone is listening in a Dolby Atmos room if lower frequencies will still pass through the listeners subwoofer if you have the LFE turned off in Penteo? Thanks!
P.S. This might be a great idea for a RUclips video. There’s lots of confusion surrounding LFE when doing Atmos mixes for music. There’s very little concrete Information out there. A video explaining how the LFE will translate in a music mix for consumers listening on a system that actually has all these channels in their home would be awesome!
Yes, thanks for the tip. The LFE channel is indeed a bit if a mystery for most people.
Thanks for the interesting video 👍 It's a shame that RUclips's content ID procedure has struck. I claim that the "stupid" AI was wrong again. 😉. My advice, always object to ominous copyright complaints. So far I have been able to successfully ward off all copyright complaints and the number of complaints was already in the 2-digit range. 😊
Unfortunately, the plugins presented are simply too expensive for a casual amateur in relation to their performance. 😢
Well, RUclips probably would have lifted that. I just felt it was not worth the effort since the audio did not any value to this video.
Unless something has changed in the past month or so, the Nugen's channel layout is not configurable, , so, for example, it does not work properly in Logic. Did not try it in PT yet. Penteo is great overall but have to agree with you about the UX/UI . . .
Yes, the Nugen stuff tends to have an issue with channel configurations. Have not tried it with PT.
You can re-matrix VST outputs in a host plugin like Bidule, Element etc. Not ideal as it's a plugin within a plugin then, but then upmix is generally set and forget sort of plugin really.
I would mostle need a thing like this plugin for mixing between say Quad and Atmos or a cube (4 channels in low speaker (quad) and four channels in eleveted speakers) to a Atmos config. This is becouse doing panning in atmos is kind of hard in Max Msp so a cube is much easier to achive..
I think that is probably one of the most important use cases. Conversion between „non traditional“ configurations.
if you could only have one out of 3DX or Panteo 16 which one please and why
Very good question. There is also a third option, which is Sound Particles Space Controller Studio as a third option. I think it depends on your application. Each one of them has its particular strengths and weaknesses. Currently, I lean towards 3DX.
Apple distribution says they don’t allow any upmix, so maybe they check object vs bed meta data
Interesting. Not sure how they would be able to check that.
They check the ADM contains object stems and binaural metadata but I know for a fact they accept upmixes as I've worked on them, but I guess they would reject just a straight stereo to 7.1.2 bed upmix like Halo or Penteo.
@@SamHocking good to know, that’s what I suspected they checked the object meta data, wonder if a silent one that moves would get passed the check
@@iamyila I'm not 100%, but the big giveaway an Atmos mix is Stereo upmix, is the Atmos stereo folddown will sound almost identical to the Stereo version. From ADMs i've seen the engineers are generally a bit more clever and will use perhaps 50-100 objects and be a bit more creative.
@@SamHocking I’m creatively mixing myself proper, so not trying to cheat, but would like to know the limits to avoid ;)
What I keep asking myself is apart from in cinemas where are people going to hear these atmos mixes? Only on earbuds from streaming? It seems like a very convoluted way to basically end up with a binaural mix, or am I missing something here’s I pretty much only mix music and I’m just not getting where this is going, can you clarify this as to what is trying to be achieved here? If quad, 5.1 surround failed how will this succeed?
We will see. One thing that is different now is that some earbuds or headphones (in particular AirPods) have integrated headtracking. So it is no longer limited to a binaural downmix, it is potentially a full Atmos experience you can get through those.
The point of atmos is it is scalable. So yeah most people are hearing a binaural mix, the difference is if you have an atmos setup you can use the exact same mix. Unlike 5.1 and 7.1 which need specific mixes for that format. This means that say a phone speaker, a headphones, a 3.1 soundbar, a 7.1.2 consumer soundbar based atmos, a studio and a cinema can all have the same mix. Of course it isn't perfect but if you currently watch atmos tv and movies it definately adds to the experience regardless (for example I watch Disney+ on headphones with dolby access and have seen some of those movies in an atmos theatre and both sound great and better than stereo). I am loving some of the pop mixes atm in atmos on amazon music just binaurally, if I ever get a proper atmos setup I can enjoy those same mixes through that setup.
Pro Tools.
A rare request. :)
@@michaelgwagner A real one nonetheless.