We Need To Talk About ATMOS
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 окт 2024
- This video is simply me thinking out loud about the pro's and con's of ATMOS as a music creator and as a consumer. There is a LOT to think about.
Join The Tribe for free here: wmg.mykajabi.c...
![Tee Grizzley - Robbery 8 [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/34_vkNV6wrU/mqdefault.jpg)
That wasn’t a “tin foil hat” you were wearing, it was your thinking cap. In 1994, I was employed in the marketing dept. of the distributor WEA and attended a NARM conference. I wasn’t a high level insider but the man I worked for was and asked me to tag along to an informal meeting at a suite in the hotel where the event was. The only things discussed were the disappointment (and anger too) at the public for not buying into the “MiniDisc” and the annoyance at whomever allowed DAT recording devices to be sold to consumers in the U.S. Essentially, they were trying to come up with yet another way to sell you your favorite albums. They’d already exhausted the 4 previous replacement formats and they were loosing their damn minds because they couldn’t find another way to get us to buy “Abby Road”. Innovation or music quality was never an issue for them - tricking the public into believing they needed a “better” version of stuff they already owned was their sole focus. As for ATMOS, I have never, not once, sat still in the middle of my living room and enjoyed music. It’s playing as I move about my house, my work or in my car. It’s why all the other surround formats failed - music isn’t consumed like films are - it's not a passive experience, it's supposed to make us move.
Totally on point here.
Excellent comment! Thank you man!
well said, appreciate the story
Great insight. I just have to bring up my gripe with the word "consume", especially with regards to music. I get such an ick when I hear it. I think music should be experienced. Consuming something implies that it is gone afterwards. I'm spitballing a bit here and likely not articulately myself very well but I have this gut feeling that consume is the wrong word to use
I will half agree with you as regards my verbiage. Consume does mean “to use up” or “expend by use”. Which would seem to indicate using it up, it’s gone and that’s that. But in the context of my post, it simply applies to the what I believe the record companies believe their customers to be. Once you’ve paid them and received your purchase, you’ve removed yourself from being a potential buyer for the same format again. To them, it’s as if you no longer exist.
Which is why they are perennially coming up with new formats - to allow you to be able to “consume” (i.e. purchase) the same song again and again.
As for that word regarding music, I “consume” food to fuel my body and continue to live. In that context, consume seems an accurate descriptor. BUT - music does the very same thing for my soul or heart or whatever one calls their emotive self. Music does feed me and (really) I need it the same way I need a bowl of cereal in the morning. Music fortifies me for the day ahead in very much the same way food does.
ATMOS is an exclusive club for big label, big budget artists. Spotify and Apple will eventually reverse their decision to block independent music.
They'll try but they'll fail like always. The masses always win. Remember Dolby? Exactly! Let them waste all those millions they possess. It's in their nature... hehehe 😂
It’s probably beneficial to have major artists offer Atmos versions so that it sets them, 'above' us mere mortals… therefore it’s better to not make it hard policy by digital distributors 😊
I know several indies (myself included) who mix in Atmos.
Who is putting 13 speakers in their living room? There is no market for this except artists who buy into studio time.. Apple and Spotify will bail on Atmos. The younger generation listens to music on ear buds and headphones. Can you name anything in which Dolby has had longterm success? The answer is no. Fold down to stereo is a separate joke.
@@russellharris9674 The headphone fold down capability means that many young people are listening in the binaural version of Atmos in headphones. That's what sets it apart from other immersive systems. No one needs to set up 13 speakers in their living room. And Dolby's been in business for almost 60 years. They have innovated with the times, moving from tape transport to the digital world. Their cinema sound systems have become ubiquitous.
U hit the nail on the head. The corrupt music industry doesn't want the small and medium artist in the game.
I started mixing in Atmos years ago when it was just released and only ProTools Ultimate supported it. Once Apple released their spatial audio, I was shocked to hear that they use the DD+JOC to re-render a 7.1.4 that they then feed into their spatial engine. Both Amazon and Tidal use the expected AC-4 IMS as Dolby intended, but have to decode it before streaming the audio to Apple devices. And now everyone is holding their breath to see if Spotify will embrace Atmos and if they do, they too will use the AC-4 IMS (assuming that Apple would never license their spatial). This will exacerbate these two ecosystems: AC-4 IMS and whatever Apple does with spatial. The horrible truth is that you can NOT create a single master that is immersive and expect it to fold down on stereo to be heard by consumers on stereo devices. I know that mixing and mastering gurus are jumping through ridiculous technical hoops to try and create a master for all bed widths and binaural, but it only destroys the whole point of what Atmos is - Immersive. It simply must be binaural or just use a separate stereo master because 99.99% of consumers listen on just two: speakers (2.0) or headphones (Binaural). No one is using a 7.1.4 or 9.1.4 setup to listen to streaming music. So just mix and master for Binaural. I have mixed and mastered multiple times with only headphones. And if you listen to my music with headphones on Atmos QC devices it sounds super close to my master. Apple spatial is defintely modified, but good. The stereo is, well you guessed it, not good. How could it be. In the end, the masses will stream with loyalty from their chosen provider without any awareness of what they are actually listening to from a spatial perspective.
This comment should be pinned as it totally outlines the whole scenario - Binaural is the only consumer product that is relevant, that and translation to Dolby Atmos sound bar systems; the rest is niche. Mint comment 👌💯😎🌟
This is the second video I’ve watched on the new “Atmos” fad and I love the logic of how you raise questions about it. And yes, I call it a “fad”. The fact that you mentioned old formats that came and went makes that point. In a world of ear buds and laptop speakers do audio inventors in that world really think that common folk are gonna invest in this madness. Most of them don’t even care about the sound of music to that level. Your point on streaming sites who are underpaying the artists in the first place threatening to bar folks from the site if they don’t use “Atmos” is a great observation.
Thank you for this video…
Stereo was also going to be a fad until it wasn't. It took a good three decades for it to become the norm. Just saying.
@@DonRossMusic mono is still used... Never went anywhere. Mono has its usecase but everything above stereophonic sound is straight out snake oil in terms of Hardware and software trickery that doesnt need "special" equipment on the other side.
Also, closed standards are just a fancy name for monopolies, who in their right mind would want that?
@@Akab People said similar things about everything more than mono for a while. I think of George Harrison in the Beatles Anthology film talking about how the early albums involved them huddled in front of a single speaker to mix. By the Get Back sessions the band was borrowing his giant Studer A80 8-channel tape machine. Change is hard.
@@DonRossMusic i mean stereo added a third dimension to audio, what does stuff like atmos really do except for some software trickery and inaccessible licensing? Even compared to other surround "standards" they didn't really add much except for very controlled/niche environments like cinemas.
@@Akab I guess it depends on how one defines “three dimensions.” Stereo is two discrete channels and essentially one is mostly panning mono signals either to both channels (the way bass guitar, kick drum and snare tend to be mixed) or favouring the left or the right create an illusion of dimensionality. So, essentially the listener is being “tricked” into perceiving dimensionality despite the fact that the music is just coming from two places and only from either in front of the listener or from a headphone on each ear. Atmos “tricks” the listener a bit more convincingly by adding side, rear and overhead speakers and by treating sounds as objects that can be placed almost anywhere in what feels much more like a three dimensional environment. It’s all trickery in the end, whether it’s stereo or Atmos. 😀
I totally agree with your assesment. I think it is a try to take back control and cut out all those pesky musicians who do their own thing without being under control of some majors.
@@CraigScottFrost It was never a requirement, except for cinema.
Spot on. Ignore it and move on from this industry scam. When the rock band playing at your local venue turns up with an 'atmos pa rig' then we'll talk about it. I think we'll be waiting a very long time. Meanwhile Dolby, Apple and the rest... stop wasting everybody's time and money and try and work out how to make lossless audio the norm for streaming and downloads. 😠
@@kadiummusic wow there are so many things wrong with this comment, I can just say please read the multichannel chapter in Floyd Toole's book on Sound Reproduction.
Please stop looking at this with such a narrow mind, this isn't some schizophrenic scheme to kill off indie producers lmao, if it were, dolby surround, dts neural x and auromatic would not be so easily available on pretty much any atmos capable processor and receiver.
And please don't be one of those braindead purists who shit on upmixing without ever trying it. Or only trying it in a poorly corrected or lackingly set up setups.
Thanks Devon. Of all the youtube talks I've heard about ATMOS, this reflects my thoughts and experience most accurately.
All your points are 100% on point! This is the record labels trying to "take back" the CD.
If i cant release my music on Spotify and so on, I will not be paying for any streaming service anymore.
Just make an Atmos mix where you copy L and R to every L or R channel. It's technically Atmos but sounds just like stereo, and who wil listen to the Atmos version? 1%?
@@AlbertWeijers how to do that without dolby renderer?
@@bhaigeniushoon Sail the high seas!
Nice job. Very well researched and articulately communicated. Dolby Atmos is a solution for a problem that does not exist. We need this like a fish needs a bicycle.
I would actually posit that the amount of research that was done was not nearly enough. This is really an op-ed, and that's 100% fine. I'm an indie who mixes a stereo and an Atmos version of everything I do now, and it's made me fall back in love with music and audio after 35 years in the game. 🙂
Its not a matter of need.
Devon, you have PERFECTLY articulated the conundrum presented by ATMOS. Having it morph into a required standard by Apple and Spotify is a clear case of the tail wagging the dog. I have a home theatre set up for 5.1 and I do have a few incredible 5.1 mixes (mostly Steven Wilson and Porcupine Tree), and while I LOVE listening to them - Steven did all the mixes himself and uses the arrangement very creatively - I don't see this as something that is universally appropriate for all music. How do we think that Miles Davis would react to having a surround version of Kind of Blue? I'm pretty sure he'd have a lot of blue language for the idea. THANKS for putting this together. It's a great template for the larger discussion about what is best for musicians, their fans, and the world at large. From the current state of things, it's primarily a boost for Dolby, Spotify, Apple, and the record labels to gain control and exact their tolls on musicians and the public. Maybe this doesn't actually rise to the level of conspiracy, but holy crap, it sure has the potential for it.😡
Granted it was during his later fusion years, but considering that there are multiple Miles albums mixed in quad, he'd likely be fine with it.
I'm old enough to remember "Quadrophonic" in the early 70's. To hear a Quad product (vinyl, tape) you had to spend a huge amount of money with four matching speakers, a four channel amplifier and a four track tape deck or Quad turntable with a special Quad stylus. After spending all that money it turned out the product was very limited. There were few Quadraphonic" recording studios to mix or re-mix earlier recordings in. It was a major bust.
The quadraphonic debacle occurred to me, too. I never bought into that one.
LOL I also wasted money on a Minidisc recorder/player, only to discover it would not allow you to record digitally, because "obviously" the public would do nothing with that but make criminal copies of big studio content (right?)! So I had a shit recorder, and no real media to even play on it. What a waste of money--a perfectly awesome technology ruined on purpose by the powers that be, to "protect" the big corporations from US.
THANK YOU! That was a breath of fresh air on the whole Atmos chatter. I think you nailed it from a business standpoint. This may be a blessing in disguise for bands who just want to get their music out there.... they can just sell Vinyl and MP3's etc... 1st time I've seen one of your videos. I have subscribed. Got bless you sir!
Thanks man!
Excellent take.
I recently heard an Atmos mix of some good pop music, in a nice commercial studio with an Atmos setup. It was striking and inspiring, but all your points ring true - who’s going to actually hear it like that?
I like the idea of the independents’ hand being forced to find or develop a new delivery system, and we can get on with producing music in our tried-and-true fashion and maybe actually make money again.
Again, great job here.
I understand for music, but I like immersive sound. Also for the upcoming Apple Vision Pro. However I create sound effects and might hear things differently.
Phenomenal perspective and very well put together points that really make you question if atmos is leaning closer and closer toward a scam each day and a way for the industry to take over and get back to their gate keeping
I'm seeing a lot of these videos about Atmos in my feed now, and I think it's great that people are calling out the issues. Good stereo playback is perfectly adequate for enjoyment of music. As you point out, the fact that Atmos is licensed makes me want to scream and run. This whole thing tastes of greedy exploitation, and I don't like it.
For the people who care about sound, they have at least 5.1 or better systems. I have had a 5.1.2 Atmos system for nearly 7 years now and about to upgrade it to 7.4.6 because I now have the space to expand it finally.
I’m going to have to read up on this a little more, because as far as I’ve heard, having Atmos isn’t a requirement to upload your music to Apple Music. It’s required if you want the chance to be put in there playlist of music that they promote. The last album I listened to on Apple Music was Black Milk “Everybody Good? “ and it’s not recorded in Atmos, it just says Lossless.
When it comes to that immersive surround experience with recording music, the only path I've worked with was using a binaural mic in a live experience. An orchestral quintet. Works great, and translates well and relatively cost effective. When it comes to experiencing Atmos, I'd only go with a truly tuned professional theater, and even those differ vastly from place to place.
Good stuff Devon. Just another way to separate a consumer with their hard earned cash.
I’m a mix engineer who is also a home theater enthusiast. My studio is only stereo but my home theater is a 7.3.4 Atmos setup. It is a really enjoyable experience watching movies on Atmos, especially the ones with reference quality Atmos mixes. I have some music tracks on these demo discs that are mixed in Atmos. They are very cool but I don’t feel the need to listen to music in Atmos as much as watching movies. Of course it would be cool to convert my studio to Atmos and offer mixes in that format but I’m not itching to do it enough to make the huge investment. I’ve never thought of the top down thing not working in Atmos. I have a few plug-ins always always on my stereo buss and I do feel they are vital to my mixes. It is weird that they don’t have a way to do that for Atmos. Maybe there is, we just don’t know it.
I have a 5.1 system in my living room for ages, but hardly ever watch a movie in that way (my wife is mostly using that tv) So ik watch movies in stereo, headphones or speakers. Is the movie less interesting, no. It's mostly a gimmick. Like the vibrating chairs in cinema's, if a guy gets punched in the face, my chair vibrates... What nonsense. In the end I get back problems from these chairs when it's a violent movie.
Compelling arguments Devon, and very succinct points. Bouncing sound of wall is opposite what the audio engineer had endeavored to present. My thoughts immediately went to the UK’s off shore Radio Caroline many years ago, which came to notoriety as the BBC had blocked broadcasting certain new sound/songs which never met their business plan, 3 minutes long and lip-synched live, etc.
Radio Caroline played the music blocked by BBC and so public demand sought their music from off shore station to hear the music they wanted to hear and not be driven down a path which they did not want.
I’d expect another music source will be generated due to public demand. Just a thought, and likely lonely!
Very well thought, explained, and said - I could not agree more. 👍 And it's an extremely important point that you mention, that most or let's just say all of those RUclipsrs soooo enthusiastic about Atmos and pushing it like crazy and all "just about to equip my studio for Atmos" are heavily sponsored - HEAVILY, they may like to always state that all they say is their own independent opinion, but hey, when Sweetwater & co are paying your bills and feeding you gear... opinions tend to flow with the wind.
Another IMHO extremely important point, along with the plain a& simple fact that most musicians do not write/arrange music for a spatial or immersive presentation or desire it and that the end user will never ever have a well set up correct Atmos rig to listen to it, as you did state, is this: Apple may be big in USA, but worldwide... not so much. Most of the world is on PC and on Android, when it comes to mobile tech (latest stats say 27,9% vs 71,4% of mobile users.!), which is where & how most music is consumed today (sadly). And we all know the binaural headphone fold-down is a gimmick, it's nowhere near what immersive should sound like, or what a 7.1.4 or 9.1.2. properly setup system sounds like.
Also, not all the world is America - music is listened to every minute of every day everywhere from India to South America, from Europe to Japan, from Russia to Tanzania, from Ghana to China, from the Andes to Tibet, etc, and the prices of Atmos licenses, gear, pro or home setups and even of mixes for the artists & labels are absolutely unviable and non feasible in many if not most, countries and economies.
So this absurd, totally unrealistic power grab move in the music world called Atmos, concocted & piloted by USA-based and americocentric ignorant self-absorbed yuppies and corporations must not only be pushed back against, it must be ridiculed and exposed.
And you did a pretty good job at it here - kudos.
👊
AF
PS: a small plugin company form Italy, Hornet Plugins, which I BTW highly recommend for several of their products and for their amazingly friendly licensing policy and prices, has already developed a virtual master bus plugin enabling stereo-style master processing for those who want to mix in Atmos, it's called SAMP. Check them out...
I solely listen to stereo, from stereo speakers linked to my stereo system. I consume music via CDs, and i have no intentions of ever changing that. Plus today's my first time hearing of ATMOS, and will hopefully be also the last time.
I wish you luck! I'm trying to do the same thing (and I only watch movies ripped from DVD as well). However, I'm increasingly coming across artists who have stopped releasing on CD, and I've had to start buying Bandcamp downloads in those cases.
You are not alone in this, I’ve seen some other professionals creating similar videos. I think Atmos has no place outside of the movie industry. Keep music Stereo!!
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication...
I agree with the vast majority of what you said.
I was playing with the atmos possibilities of my setup since 18 months, thru binaural & I tried to listen to atmos mixes, thru binaural as well. My conclusion so far is it doesn't work for my music and for other people's music. At all, it's a joke.
And 90% of the final listeners will hear my music thru headphones at the best. Obviously not with 12 speakers, sat in the sweet spot in a treated room. Who could imagine that! 🤣
So, I gave up my atmos compositions/trials 3 months ago. No more waste of time with that.
Like you the music I compose (see my YT channel) could be realy compatible with 3d things and I was realy excited by this new way to express my creativity but, well, this system doesn't work for me now and I'll certainly not invest in that. I can achieve far better results for 3D ear candies/FX/ambiances with binaural renderings of ambisonic sounds.
And my own music is not on spotify or apple. They don't pay, they never will and I boycott them since the begining, my lossless music is on bandcamp.
And I subscribe to you channel!
End user here: can't wait to upgrade my surround setup to Atmos next year. After years of enjoying a full-range stereo setup I've come to realise it is barely scratching the surface of what sound reproduction can do.
Regardless of how giant a leap it was, it is still only a single step up from mono
A consumer perspective:
For music - I agree with the majority of what you are saying, spatial audio is fun, but in no way required for my enjoyment... as mentioned, and indicated here in the comments, most of the music I listen to is 2ch stereo (ear buds +90% of the time). I will, on occasion/for fun, listen to music through my home theater system set to "multi-channel" stereo, 11 channels in my current setup, but for the times when I want a pure audio experience, I switch to two channel / stereo / pure direct (No DSP as I understand it).
For movies - I disagree. I have been listening to movies at home in 7.2 for the past ~18 years, and 7.2.4 just recently... A proper ATMOS system is not bouncing any sound intentionally, there are setups that work as you described (bouncing sound), but they are a work around for a proper setup... and please don't get me started on sound bars (...the ultimate work around!).
Just my two cents, YMMV.
I invested in a bare minimum consumer Atmos setup (5.1.2), repurposing my 'old' speakers like you described. I'd never even heard of Atmos, but I'd been holding back from experiencing 5.1 for a decade plus. When I discovered my AVR had ports for 2 more speakers, I thought I may as well get some heights as well. I am so ghetto you would laugh heartily at how I've managed to place these heights in my untreated bedroom (it looks ridiculous). So far I'm enjoying it for music and movies though. I'm also an amateur bedroom recording 'artist', I bought the Dolby Atmos renderer and figured out a way to "mix" my music on consumer grade AVR (you've gotta set it up as 7.1 to bypass the encoding process and keep all channels open for direct monitoring). I've put mix in quotation marks because obviously any notion of accuracy is completely forsaken by my ghetto setup. It's a bit like the X-files for me - "I want to believe". I'm a big fan of Devin Townsend and looking forwards to his forthcoming Atmos mixes from his new Atmos studio. Some Atmos mixes definitely seem lackluster, uncreative and probably so due to being coerced into having one just for the sake of having one by the new standard. But I, as a consumer, want to hear more Atmos content! Just thought I'd put it out there, as a guy on a budget ghetto setup. I'm almost dismayed to hear the arguments against it because framing it as rebellion against Big Atmos has appeal too! 🤣
The Ramones don’t need no Atmos !
Thanks Devon - Nice video - one bit of info: Spotify does NOT require an ATMOS mix (at least according to DistroKid). And I think Colt was saying for Apple Music, one cannot be playlisted with a non-ATMOS mix. but you can still submit and regular stereo mix.
Anyone - please let me know if I'm wrong. Thanks again.
Years ago, a sound engineer told me, they'll introduce new channel configurations, but it will always go back to stereo since it makes the most sense. In how we hear, and a practical way to deliver the sound. I doubt it will have mass acceptance; to get a better experience than stereo, you'll have to spend as much as on a car, and have some technical knowledge as well. Most people aren't going through that, and the lack of adoption could lead to it's demise.
Your points were very well made and I totally agree! As someone who has worked in recording studios since the 80's, I feel that this ATMOS mixing is a complete farce! Budgets are so tight in the recording industry, how can they expect us recording producers/engineers to spend so much money on a Dolby mixing system!
The answer to your question is--they don't! They expect you to give up or die trying (bankruptcy).
Thank you for this exhaustive, rubber-meets-road overview. Subbing!
I'm sorry for a long post ahead, but I personally love ATMOS for music (and I'm not being "sponsored" to say that either, just so you know), though I listen primarily on Apple Music through Apple's AirPods Pro (AirPods Max, from what I understand are better) with head tracking on (I recommend this if you want the best AirPods experience), which I think is what music streaming services are aiming for with ATMOS/Spatial/360 Audio. Unless you're an audiophile, not everyone can afford a 7.1.4 speaker setup (unless you're a movie buff), whereas anyone can afford a set of ear/headphones (which, I think, answers your "Venue of listening" question) or speakers like HomePods or Sonos, though I don't believe it sounds good coming from laptop/computer/phone speakers. When I listen to a lot of Spatial Audio mixes (yes, some mixes aren't too good), I actually find it gives more room for instruments and voices to be heard. The two Elton John songs from "The Lion King" are a great example (the choir is so much more pronounced) and I don't know if I could go back to listening to them in standard stereo. Even Elton's "Rocket Man" sounds great! A lot of songs on his "Diamonds (Deluxe)" compilation sound great, as does Spice Girls "Wannabe" and some of Michael Jackson's "Thriller" album uncover sounds you can't hear in the stereo version because they've been buried among layers of other instruments. Being hearing impaired, a surround sound room is useless for me, even with movies. I can understand artists and producers/engineers being concerned about mixing in the format because of the expense of it all. I do know that when I do eventually put music out into the world, there'll be an ATMOS and Stereo mix. My ATMOS mixes would be done primarily in headphones, but should transfer to 7.1.4 easily. I don't view ATMOS as a fad or gimmick at all, as long as it's done properly. However, if the streaming services are putting out a rule preventing people putting out music without an ATMOS mix, that is unfair. Going back to the Elton John Lion King songs, if you listen with AM with either AirPods sets, the choir sounds like it's coming from behind you, but turn your head left/right, the choir will play through one ear or the other. I'm trying to look at this from the consumer's perspective who can't afford/don't want a massive surround room. In saying all this, unless Apple and other streaming services partner with hearing aid manufacturers to bring ATMOS streaming to hearing aids, those users will always be listening in stereo, even with movies. I guess I'm a little tired of hearing of people talking like surround sound rdesigned rooms or venues are the "one and only" way of listening to ATMOS music. While I love both Stereo and ATMOS, they're not going to help people who acquire one-sided hearing, which is where Mono mixes will come in handy. I've said my say.
You summarized it very well: Atmos is a mix of a gatekeeper drive by the big player distributors, assisted by gatekeeping ambitions by high level facilitators (producion and mixing facilies rendered obsolete by the "democratization" of the art and craft of mixing - applauded by a hardware industry that didn't have a revolutionary selling point (like HDTV, Dolby 5.1, CD) for years. Ask yourself how many of your friends and family will say to themselves "Sure, I'm just going to nail myself to this listening position for the duration of this playlist". For better or for worse, those days are over. Flexibiliy, mobility is key. I yet have to find a single atmos mix that sounds better on headphones than the stereo mix.
I can agree with you on all points. I never considered the "re-taking of control" side before and I was unaware that Spotify is now requireing an Atmos submission too. I think for the serious audiophille who sets up a room specifically for this it might work, but only on certain types of music like you pointed out. And them how much can a person take of that. Sensory overload in my opinion. After dabiling with recording and mixing for years I finally invested in my Mobile recording set up to work in my local area. I was completely frustrated when all the hub bub about Atmos started. I appreciate your take on this and am now not at all concerened about if I need to invest in Atmos. I will continue foeward in Stereo and will be very content. Thank you!
Sir remember DVD Audio and DTS music or check out Grover Washington Jr. Wine Light in surround sound. Or SADE Life Promise back than, was great to me not Dolby Atmos. I do completely agree with you.
ATMOS is today's 3D Bluray. Remember that? Yeah... same thing will happen.
Great video Devon. I agree with you. And I'm not investing in Atmos until I have WAY more than 0% of my clients asking for it (which is the current percentage). Could you provide links to your sources for the statement made at 12:26 that Spotify and Apple Music now require Atmos mixes? This is the first I've heard of this and I can't find any indication of this in their delivery specs. My clients are currently submitting stereo masters to both of these platforms with no problems. Thanks!
Mono to stereo was an amazing experience. Stereo to 5.1 was ok. As mentioned in another comment, I do not sit and listen to music unless I am meditating and thus lying perfectly still and just letting the music be absorbed. It is in the background usually 24/7 playing mostly electronic tunes by JMJ, TD, Kraftwerk etc.
Wow! Wonderful analysis! Thanks for enlightening us. The core of music is melody, rhythm and harmony not speaker systems. If business people are trying to be the main influence in musicians work they will ultimately fail
Well said! Im with you 100%
and it wouldn't be the first time!
Mix in stereo, someone make a stereo to atmos mixdown plugin. Honestly atmos sounds cool for about 1 minute " wow shit is above me and behind me" and then i want to actually have a focus point to enjoy the music. We are focus/aim based humans, I wonder who is gonna wait for the " Man I love this part, it's gonna spin around the top of your head and distract you from what's happening".
Atmos makes sense for cinema, but don’t see it taking off in the consumer realm. Back when DVD technology was new, I was part of a team working on audio decoder chips for DVD players. Many multichannel high resolution formats were poised to become the new cool listening experience. What took off instead were mp3 files. The public wanted convenience and portability instead of something that required them to be in the perfect listening position in order to experience it. I can see it being a great experience for certain types of music, but I can’t see most of the public really caring.
Great video. Atmos is an attempt by the major labels to wrestle back some of the control and profits they lost when music became more democratized with the advent of desktop music production. It also appears to be an attempt by Apple to solidify their position in personal audio by differentiating Airpods, HomePods, and now their new AR headset. Of course, when Apple gets behind anything everyone else jumps in line to get their piece of the pie. It all reeks of corporate greed and is good for neither consumers nor artists. The good news is that the need to install 12 speakers in a living room is a non-starter for 99% of people, and Atmos on headphones is gimmicky and not even as good as stereo in most cases. My guess is that it will eventually fade away like other esoteric audio technologies that people never asked for and were ultimately unwilling to pay for.
Atmos is a solution to a problem that acually nobody has. That's all.
The biggest push with Atmos is in the headphone space with Apple’s AirPods, as they have real time computation for things like head tracking or device position relative to the headphones. It’s a gimmicky experience (I personally detest it). My guess is this is how 99% of consumers interact with Atmos mixes apples. AirPods are a larger business than all of Spotify and several other tech companies combined.
Im not one for conspiracies but Apple went all in on atmos and thus spotify was a me too, which the record companies supported as it does create a barrier. Inevitably though what we will get is just a bunch of subpar mixes for atmos from smaller artists.
Very well said! Thank you for your insight on this topic.
Dude, I just discovered your channel about 30 minutes ago. This is the second video I've been through you and I'm highly enjoying your content. I've been shaking out my boots about Atmos and thinking that I need to go back to Fullsail lol just for the free classes again, which is one benefit they gave you, but I totally agree unless you're doing something like Pink Floyd or just one of my favorite bands ever ever this technology is probably gonna be useless and it is trying to be us as away for the elitist to take over.
I've worked on many great films in my lifetime Lord of the rings, Batman, animated series, etc., etc. and recorded many good albums and I never needed Atmos so honestly, I don't think I need it now . Before hearing this, I must admit I was absolutely terrified.
Excellent Appreciation. I once saw a RUclips video declaring Home Studios will disappear soon due to Atmos Technology.Particularly myself, and many of my Left and Right customers are not afraid of it. We are still working hard to get a Mud Free, Sparkling Stereo Mix.
ATMOS is the classic 'solution looking for a problem.' I produce music and have a fairly hi-end (turntable, DAC, tube amp, etc) listening system in my living room and I will never invest $$$ into something like ATMOS as a consumer or producer. Devon, I agree...it's a total money grab by corporations.
Thanks for your comment!
You've asked precisely the questions that many of us have asked. I believe the future will be primarily, not exclusively, but primarily centered around in-ear or over-the-ear devices, especially the Air Pods. Perhaps, just perhaps, despite what we know that mixing generally is not done with headphones, since listeners will use Air Pods, maybe the tech will be good enough to mix that way, too. I just don't want to be like the guy who in 1918 said everything that can be invented has been invented. Interesting day in which we live. Thank you for this EXCELLENT video! Keep 'em coming.
Great Analysis. I think you said it all. Like you said what kind of compressor setup does one need. The interfaces and routing disaster.... I sub'd Great stuff keep it coming
Hi Devon, thanks for a daring video.I would agree with almost everything you've said with the exception of one thing; I've made a career for over the past 25 years on designing and building Home Theatres. Although most of those were for upper end income earners, still quite a few "regular" home owners have installed home theaters. So maybe in the sense that the majority of the public, those and Dolby Atmos is a moot point. As far as sound considerations: I've been a diehard 2 channel guy all my life and have the luxury of owning a very expensive dedicated room for same. Without question, I think Atmos is great for movies. Movies have sounds coming from all around you almost all the time, just the addition of 2 ceiling speakers adds a 3 dimensionality that adds considerably to the experience. However, getting those parameters correct in most people's homes is not likely to happen under most conditions. I would agree that music comes from in front of the listener for the most part, but if you add surround ambience to the playback it brings the listener closer to a "live" event feeling, most stereo mixes miss the mark for this. That being said, it's a big price to pay for both the creators and the final users to have that added dimension. From a business model I don't see it being practical thus alluding to the "Industry Control" you were mentioning. Not good ...Some genres like electornica / EDM, etc, lend themselves very well to an "immersive" experience, but just like the invention of "stereo" recording and playback, it's being misused and abused for general music playback, sounds just do NOT come at you in real life that way. So you ARE RIGHT, music wasn't intended to be experienced that way! Holding any of the surround recording processes to a standard outside the recording studio is almost impossible at the consumer end short of the most elite Home Theatres costing above $100K! As a music lover, AV designer, and aspiring musician, I would love any advancement with the recording and playback processes. I can design a 2 channel room that comes very close to sounding like the, "you are there" experience, but it isn't inexpensive. The only point it falls a little short on would be the complex ambient trails / reverb of the venue it was performed in / recording shortcomings aside. It would be nice to maybe have just 2 above rear speakers which could add to ambience with proper time alignment ! Though we may not see a musical future for Atmos, we are currently living in a world of non reality which most people seem to be aspiring to ....
I'll add, I think it's disgusting to block artists from publishing thier music for not producing in Atmos !!
Let's start a new format for that !! audio by di tomasso
I believe It will always fall back to the lowest common denominator. I think it will go the way of Quad, 5.1 and other feeble attempts. Accessibility will always rule the day.
Speaking of accessibility, I highly doubt the tools for mixing in Atmos are even screen reader accessible.
The audio industry which I’ve worked in my entire life has developed so many ways to listen to music other than stereo
The hardware portion of electronics industry relays on new ways of listening to music to increase sales and profits to stay relative. It started in the 70,s with Quadriphonic sound. Follow the money
In 60 jears I met 3 people only who had any kind of surround system at home. All the others were not nearly interested in such direction. And I know nobody who is able to afford such a system. It is a exclusive hobby for rich people.
I have a question about using Dolby Atmos as a tool to look into a proof of concept for object oriented live music delivery in large live venues.
The problem we are addressing is where the venue needs multiple speakers to provide the required SPL, detail can be lost. For example, many musicians report that, when playing large venues, they have to simplify some of their parts because the more complex elements of the music get lost in these performances.
The assumption we are making is that the brain has difficulty in processing the multiple path lengths of the audio from the line arrays.
The brain can handle multiple path lengths, and does so every time we are in a room. The assumption that we want to test is that the brain of the average audience member is not familiar with the multiple path lengths from a line array and has difficulty processing this information. This produces the result that clarity is lost on the audience.
The solution would be to have single speakers for each performer. Then have multiple speakers in the venue, preferably at the walls of the venue where the audio for each performer is delayed by the path length from each performer to each loudspeaker. d&b audiotechnik have already been doing something similar to this for several years for theatre productions.
We want to test our assumption. It is possible that this problem is due to different issues such as bad acoustics, for example. So rather than write our own code to test this, it would be good to use something like Dolby Atmos or Ambisonics to provide the calculations for delay for each object (performer) to each speaker. We would not need to use the ceiling speakers for this just the side and back speakers.
The question is: can Dolby Atmos provide a condition where we can align the delays from each object to produce a coherent waveform from each loudspeaker in a live venue?
Given that cinema theatres have different dimensions, does Dolby Atmos provide a way of dealing with these delay calculations? Or would we need to place our speakers in specified location? Which would not be a problem for us, we would just stick to the specified placements of the speakers.
The main argument against using distributed speakers is that the many speakers will interfere with each other. It is possible that d&b audiotechnik has already proven this to be wrong, but it would be good to prove this ourselves for the case of live music with our loudspeakers, which have been designed with this issue in mind.
The other questions we need to answer are, does the audience or performers care about being able to solve this problem? It’s better to find the answers to these questions by using someone else’s software rather than writing our own.
I think one point that gets missed is that Atmos in the context of delivery does not specify the number of channels. You can happily mix 2.1 all day long. They simply want projects delivered in a mulitichannel capable format. It is not a fixed format. Think of it as a container format. With this in mind your investment really becomes the cost of an encoder. Most f the consumption now is sound bars, earbuds and headphones. I don’t understand all the worry about this. Keep happily mixing in stereo make killer music. Worst case scenario you are out a couple hundred bucks.
What made this whole thing make a tiny bit of sense to me is the binaural mode, that you can listen to and mix on headphones, even though it's probably a similar experience to the sound bars, where it's sort of faking the 3D.
So my take now is that while the home studios and indies won't be as locked out of this as I initially thought, there is still a fair bit of gatekeeping because you'll end up with 2 kinds of Atmos mixes; the big budget mixes done in the big rooms that will sound weird in headphones, and then the headphone mixes intended specifically for the Spotify and Apple users listening in earbuds, that will sound weird in the big rooms. So... 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
Oh and I was made aware of this by a producer friend, but as a consumer, this was absolutely out of my radar, and I never would have cared outside of a mixing perspective. Stereo just works, and this... in a few decades maybe, but right now it's gimmicky and untested in a mass consumer setting
You make some excellent points, many of which I agree with.
I do have an Atmos layout in my studio and I mix primarily in 3rd order Ambisonics and have been doing so for several years now. I have Blue Ripple decoders that can produce a Dolby Atmos bed if I want to but in reality, almost all of my audience will listen to my music in stereo. If successful binaural headphone decoding that suits any pair of ears can be achieved in future, that could be a legitimate and practical way for many more to hear my Ambisonic mixes. I don't need Dolby Atmos for that though. I can go directly from 3D ambisonics to binaural.
This whole Atmos thing sounds like a desperate attempt by the industry to keep their exclusive club treading water to survive. We don't need them.
In my ideal tiny little world we would finally adopt a non licence-protected spacial audio format as a standard (maybe Ambisonics or an improved version of it, since the patents run out) which maybe even has some EQ, compression or even effects parametrised and would improve over time but stay compatible and software upgradeable. And let's assume the issues for proper music representation and also of different microphone types are ironed out (unlike Atmos). This way we could detach the channels from the speakers and to an extent the sound from the speaker type and setup but the music could still be mastered as it is intended to be listened to by the artists and the engineers (being it 1-n sources, in one or multiple points, distributed on a line or in 3D space). But at the same time we would gain the possibility to listen to music/film audio in any setup the best way the setup can reproduce it given that the equipment is configured and set up well by the manufacturer and the cosnumer (e.g. downmix spacial audio to a two speaker setup or properly represent the same music in binaural headphones or a multi speaker room environment) without having to master for high end setups, cheap speakers, stereo, multispeaker, car audio or headphones. Further more we could also create spacial mixes later on from the same audio material if we want to. Higher end setups can adapt mastering parameters to represent best the room and speaker accoustics instead of EQ them out of an already baked in final mix.
A bit like vector graphics compared to fixed resolution bitmaps or parametric CAD models compared to surface modelling.
Brands like Dolby, THX and who else feels keen to can still license specifically tailored equipment and setups or setup standards to studios, cinemas and homeuser equipment as before, but hardware does not become obsolete all the time because the locked in, licensed DSP is not compatible with the latest format.
But I don't see this happen as still less licences would be sold in the end and as you analysed this is also an industry lock-in scheme to keep small producers out. My biggest fear is that Atmos will end up becoming the same shit show for music as it happened with all prior surround formats for films where stereo or surround was thrown at cheap upmix algorythms to generate washed out results, but which still complied to the shiny new format.
totally agree. seems like theyre trying to price out the home studio to keep the big ones in business since home studios have become so good.
The comparison to 3D-TV is perfect. This is at most a gimmick that people will go "wow" when they hear at first. But mostly people don't want the guitar in one corner and the drums in the other - or instruments flying around the room from one side to the other. I do some DJing and PA work too how are we gonna deal with it there??
Stereo is 5 separation of sound dimension
Left and right 2
Mid mono 1
Side left right in a 2 dimension
100% agree with you
Well thought out and explained. Thank you
Great discussion, appreciate it. I am seeing and hearing more discussions about the economics and pragmatism of Atmos versus the inherent technical capabilities of Atmos. Would I like to have an Atmos system and listen to music mixed in multichannel format? Of course. I am old enough to remember quadrophonic sound. If you knew someone who could afford a quadrophonic system and could sit in the dead center of the room, it sounded pretty cool. That was in the 70s. Was it amazing? Yes. Where did it go? I don't know but it's gone. Even for stereo mixes, you don't really hear stereo unless you sit in the sweet spot between the speakers. And often times stereo mixes are effectively mono depending on the environment you are in. The economics will drive the adoption, not the inherent capabilities. The real question to ask is who economically benefits from Atmos? For now, anyway, it doesn't seem to be the artist and it doesn't seem to be the consumer.
Thanks Devon, great video, you said it, ...it's like my own thinking of the Atmos!
I have a pair of Sonos Era 300s with Atmos compatibility & "height" drivers, exclusively for streaming music. Sounds pretty good, better than stereo mostly but not what I'd call "immersive". More just like a very high quality "Stereo Wide" switch. When I go back to stereo from Atmos, I do notice it, but not for very long.
I absolutely agree with you on all aspects. As you I have a lot invested in my studio and I don't see ATMOS as an upgrade for most end users of music. Personally I'd rather have 2 masters cut - one for digital stereo and one for vinyl - to accommodate those who enjoy consuming music on that (old school audiophiles and dj's I suppose), than have stereo and Atmos 🤷🏻♂ Right now the whole fight on whether to adapt to ATMOS or not must be huge amongst manufacturers of everything from in-ears to headphones to speakers etc. - I think it will end up as 5.1/7.1 surround as something that works well for home cinema use (and professional venues) and not much else, unless 90+% of the big players on the audio-market decide to go all in on the music side of it (and most of them have so much invested in stereo that it'll be a huge risk in investment for them). To be honest I hope it'll end up as an option for those who choose to listen that way and definitely not replace stereo in any way - but I guess we'll see... Thanks for great content- you just got yourself a new subscriber.🎧
Many artist do atmos mixes to simulate the standard stereo mix, thus getting both to sound the same.
I would assume Apple and Spotify require the music to be in Atmos format and don't care how you have actually panned it. You could create an Atmos format file with everything panned to the front left and right speakers and be compliant. I believe licenced Atmos plugins are available for most DAWs for $2 - $3 hundred dollars.
You are absolutely right with regards to being corralled into using Atmos but there is a work around. If you have Logic Pro X - for example - Atmos renderer is included in the program. I would do a stereo mix as normal and then bounce down group stems -vocals, backing vocals guitars, drums, bass, keys, fx etc - to 48kHz 24bit 24 fr and do an extra mix in Atmos surround in Logic on headphones. No extra costs except maybe for better headphones. Atmos spatial is normal for Apple headphones now. It’s not so difficult. “Henny Penny the sky is NOT falling!”
I stated ass much in my vid. I did further research on the subject and the only issue at the moment working binaurally is that it's important to have a discreet centre speaker rather than a phantom centre. Otherwise the binaural render has phase dropouts in the centre. For stems, in that case, it would be important to use mono stems for the centre channel according to Andrew Scheps. But you have my thinking exactly. Mix stereo in PT then export stems to logic. I like how the Dolby Renderer is integrated into Logic better than in tandem with PT, but there are a few problems in that I can't find any delay capabilities in the speaker outputs, and I don't see a way to control the overall volume of the speaker array. I'm considering starting with a 5.1 speaker set which would cover the very basics of discreet monitoring. I would only need a centre channel speaker to get to that point. But I am still bothered by the consumer end where I just am not convinced the home Atmos system is quite there, or if it ever will be. The expense of the centre speaker could still pay off in 5.1 I suppose. Thanks for your comment.
Apple recently announced the Vision Pro headset to come out next year. It’s supposed to have there best ever Dolby Atmos spatial audio system built in, that can specially adapt to the acoustics of any room. Not for anyone though, especially for the price. How ever the price is a lot less than a real Dolby Atmos system. Something to think about for now…
I'm in FULL agreement! This definitely is gatekeeping by the big studios and big distributors to keep out the little guys and try to take us back to the "bad old days" (good for THEM). JUST SAY NO TO ATMOS! I promise you--as a consumer, I will NEVER buy Atmos equipment. I have a 5.1 system--for movies. I still listen to my music in stereo, and it's all I want or need. I am not in the music business, but I care about music, and about it being open to everyone in every phase of production. This is gentrification on an industrial scale; it pisses me off, and I HATE it. It will only lead to less diversity in music, more elitism in music, and to underpaid musicians having to beg for the attention of studios. It's bad for consumers, terrible for artists, and devastating for small studios. This is music for the 1%, and as far as I'm concerned they can go to Hell.
Awesome video! I guess you read mind! Wow, I’ve been engineering since the 80s and my thoughts are the exact same thoughts. This boils down to the fact that industry is only successful when the consumer is included in these decisions for change. I remember Quadraphonic stereo and how cool it was, but even remembered saying, to enjoy this I need two more speakers and the right amps. The industry was so greedy for money they forgot to answer “how are folks going to consume our product?” Or “how will folks benefit from our product?” One example of change that did answer how customers will benefit, was the introduction of the .mp3 format. Yea the quality is lower, but the industry realized that most consumers prefer convenience (in this case more song storage) over quality. I just laugh at the whole thing and say, how many consumers have an ATMOS system to listen to ATMOS music……hardly any. Granted there is that demographic of people that just wants to be a part of the latest fad…even if there is no true benefit…..like buying a sound bar and thinking you will get surround sound or upgrading studio gear when you haven’t mastered or grown out of what you currently have. Knowledge is key. Beautiful looking studio by the way!
Hi man. I think you are spot on with your assessment, gatekeepers want to regain more control over the industry. Nice one for the Bob Horn experience, I think Atmos will only survive as a plaything for the rich.
Nah! As with most new, initially-rejected tech, as soon as the tech dramatically improves and lowers in price, mass adoption will ensue, and everyone will come onboard, even if kicking and screaming. I'm from the bygone era of mono. I remember the first Stereo Walkman. ("STEREO" was plastered on the side.) Even then, stereo was said to be a gimmick, especially by those who hadn't actually experience it at that point. The rest is history. For ATMOS, in the next few generation of ATMOS and ambisonic earbuds, headphones, soundbars, etc., as an increasing number of manufacturers jump in, Sony reduces licensing to encourage even more adoption, you'll then have better quality at lower prices. ATMOS and ambisonics will overcome resistance and proliferate at lower prices over time, just as stereo did.
@@BigMTBrain nonsense. Fake atmos 'surround' from 2 speakers sounds like garbage. That makes it a non-starter for the majority of consumers off the bat.
Stereo vs. mono comparisons are irrelevant.
People that use strained comparisons like these clearly do not have the ability to separate quality mixes from the novelty of what amounts to hyperactively automated panning.
@@g10118 As stated in my first sentence: "as soon as the tech dramatically improves and lowers in price". Interesting view you have. We'll see where things are in another few years. I know you see the future clearly and perfectly, so I can't compete with that. Somehow, though, I can't be stuck in a "now" and "today" mindset when I work in the AI field, and I see up close how AI is transforming EVERYTHING rapidly. The transformation of industries and technologies is happening so fast because all entrepreneurs are rushing headlong to innovatively apply AI to gain first-mover advantage, either by enhancing what they have, creating something new, or exceling beyond and overtaking the current leaders and current leading tech. ...
As far as I know, ALL current surround technologies (except for one I've heard of currently evolving at Yamaha) are based on HUMAN-derived algorithms, and as we know, human minds can only do what humans minds can do. Human minds enhanced and extended by AI is a whole other beast that, when the AI is sufficiently trained, can tease out unseen subtleties in signals, abstract those subtleties, and apply them in ways that are still mysterious to the human mind alone. It's happening in so many fields that it should be obvious to anyone who isn't biased or stuck with a "no, No, NO!" mindset that it's inevitable that AI applied to improving and simplifying immersive audio will happen relatively soon. ...
As I stated earlier: We'll see where things are in another few years. I just don't understand people who don't understand that there is NO technology that is not continually evolving. NONE! Especially with AI methodologies and models themselves improving at an exponential rate. But... to each his own I guess. ...
EDIT: Correction: My mistake was saying "in another few years". Instead, it's more accurate to say, let's see where things are... THIS TIME NEXT YEAR in immersive and surround audio. THAT'S how fast AI is changing things. Hahaha... so fast, I could even say A FEW MONTHS from now, and have a GREAT chance of getting the timing right. Even then, the evolution beyond this next one will come even faster, and it will never stop!
this is the best video on the atmos topic. thank you.
For the record, I currently have a 7.1.4. Atmos setup with Focal trio 11s except ceiling speakers and sub. You're right, this shit is expensive and the first thing I did was figure out how to spit out an "old school" stereo mix in P.T.. I definitely agree with everything you said with one exception.... Obviously, I produce in different genres but, I think producers of Hip Hop and/or EDM are not concerned with where the band is positioned (there is no band) so, most electronic producers will automate panning as an effect as opposed to something they're looking at. All that being said, I will place the main parts of the song in fixed positions and then use motion to make the "FX" pieces more interesting. All the while keeping stereo for the meat and potatoes. Great video! very thought provoking
I think Andrew Scheps said something along those lines. The mix is still mainly front L-R, which is where I spent my money already. But I think I can do some rears with my Mackie HR824s, and figure it out from there. Maybe some Rockits on the ceiling. Maybe Focal Shape 50s on the sides. But my iD44 isn't compatible so to say. I have the outputs, but I need to figure out a way to control the overall level parallel to the mix bus. I would use Logic with stems from my PT session. Any ideas?
go to music streaming services that don't require atmos then, wherever the consumer goes, the industry will follow, look at napster, they fought it, now it's mainstream. I use tidal, cd's or vinyl mostly. And I do have all the surrounds in my house I love immersive music & just getting into immersive theater / projection. but I mostly listen to music in 2 channel or quad now through my black ice preamp, sounds great, soundstage is amazing.
oh, and, also, it is worth watching the recent Steve Wilson interview with Steve Wilson by Rick Beato, a guy who is known for creating 5.1 mixes for himself and others
We have a genlec atoms setup in our studio specifically for the games industry.
Of course at the start I mixed music on it. But when i tested to hear what it would a atoms sounds like folded to stereo, it was bloody awful. Of course.
The eq for stereo is different that full spectrum atoms
Can anyone actually point to any documentation from any of the steaming services that actually states that Atmos is a new requirement? I mix in Atmos (because it's likely the future...and it's awesome when done well), but I have yet to hear anything above the rumour level of any requirements from any of the streams.
from a guy that done technology&music production courses u spot on sir
Nice. On point. Even earlier, three-channel stereo, David Hafler's pseudo-quadraphonic, and quadraphonic. No go. Ambisonic is another, and rather sophisticated, format for sonic immersion. Not so much a go, either. Binaural with headphones really can reproduce a palpable immersive sonic experience, but not a lot of material there, and do most people listening to music, or other reproduced sound people might listen to, care that much? From what I've seen, for most people, even to love music, it hardly matters what it's played back with. And most folks don't invest a lot of effort or money in a good two-channel system. Then, many who may, have enough of a challenge just getting two speakers set up so that they work properly, if they even try. There's always been the claimed promise of other formats, and there certainly can be places for it.
Great video 😊 As you say, the thing to bear in mind from the Apple, Spotify perspective is that these companies rely on the millions of indie artists who supply content. The Atmos compatibility stipulation will deny access to their bread and butter artists, primarily home recordists and small label run creators. If the Atmos policy did come into operation it would be gentrifying the music industry, the antithesis of Rock n Roll and at its offshoots!
That is well said sir. It is eerie as we see some areas of the country basically economically removing the middle class and here we are with Dolby trying to remove the middle class producers of music. I predict if this pushes through new stereo platforms will definitely emerge.
Still waiting to see any actual evidence of any of the streaming services making any Atmos requirement.
@@DonRossMusic Good point, we are mere speculators at this point. Perhaps some of the pushback noise will make a difference.
@@odmusicman Thanks for pointing that out. Many people on this and other threads are talking as if this "gatekeeping" strategy were actually true, for which I have seen no evidence at all.
@@DonRossMusicme either. This dialogue loses its credibility in the first paragraph of what he says. If you don’t want to do Atmos, don’t. Just submit a stereo version. The only thing that bothers me about these engineers’ rants is when they judge listeners for daring to think that Atmos sounds amazing in real Atmos capable rooms.
That said, the real problem is the platforms ALLOWING Atmos mixes at all unless they are artistically and musically mixed. And that can only be done by a few worthy talented Atmos engineers. The Wild Wild West situation it is in is the real mess.
Two places you may find Atmos (Cinema) or Fayre ground possibly (where you pay to get the experience) I didn't say the car because its too small plus your focus needs to be on the road and not focused on what sound is going to come out of the speaker at the back. In other words not really affective! Even in the Cinema Atmos sounds empty and not full like Stereo.
And what nobody is saying. 7.4.1 has a sweetspot very narrow so even in cinemas the seats other than center ones are shit because they get the ITD wrong.
We're probably going to get a new music distributor other than spotify or Apple music
Gratitude & Appreciation💯
Just like in all the new cars nowadays that have decent stereos they actually have a center channel in there to lock the dialogue in the center, even though you’re sitting off to the right or left depending on your seat
Follow the money
I look at this different, i love atmos! We need to think of how people enjoy music today, personally i think musicians need to start making music more visual. Live concerts, live studio sessions. Kids dont listen to music mainly because its not on RUclips. Haha
RIVETING examination. (Subscribed!) I'm very excited about composing and producing for ATMOS and ambisonics... but only for my own personal experimentation and enjoyment. I completely agree with all of your points. As you imply, they are more caught up in the thrill rather than the practicality. And, true, it is a new revenue pathway, that if the various distribution platforms mandate it, will create nearly guaranteed massive inflows for those pushing the format and required tech to realize it, both in the home and the studio. ...
As a tech head, I like that immersive technology is being pushed forward. As with the growing emphasis on AI "aligning" with human "values" and wellbeing, what would make this entire immersive push more palatable, and even more desirable, is if GREAT emphasis and marketing was on aligning with stereo through all phases: production, delivery, and consumption -- somehow not relegating stereo to antiquated second-class but maintaining it as equal or first class. ...
Where and when I see the investment in immersive audio now paying off in the future is, and here's my patent pending bit, AI vision and extremely narrow audio beam forming (AI controlled of course) are used to beam any surround configuration independently to a variably limited number of people in an environment, no matter their position or orientation, even compensating for occlusions by computing optimal surface reflections and timing adjustments as needed for any individual. (Similarly using low-power, fast-moving color lasers to feed AR and VR independently to each head-, orientation-, and eye-tracked individual.) (A quick search on "audio beam forming", among other results, returns an article published by Digital Trends in 2021 highlighting Holoplot, a company researching audio beam forming with some success.) Soooo, while surround is now and will be a plaything, gimmick, or nuisance for the relative short-term, I think it will be the "new stereo" in that glorious light and sound beaming future X years from now. ...
EDIT: Ok, forget beam-forming. Wireless ambisonics earbuds will be so improved and lower cost in the next generations that the market will then grow to critical mass for surround mixes to be preferred. I think it might be wise to consider it this way and develop the surround mixing chops now to be positioned for that inevitable future. "Inevitable" because Sony on this matter is like a Terminator: ...
"Listen, and understand. [Sony ATMOS] is out there, it can't be bargained with, it can't be reasoned with, it doesn't feel pity or remorse or fear, and it absolutely will not stop… EVER, until [stereo is] dead!”, Kyle Reese.
Haha... It appears Fabfilter embraces the ATMOS terminator. Just discovered this on KVR Audio: "[Fabfilter] Added support for Atmos 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 7.1.4, 9.1.4 and 9.1.6 surround formats to the AAX plug-ins (the VST, VST3 and AU plug-ins already supported this)."
Funny, I get a totally immersive musical environment every time I put on a set of headphones...
First off, thanks for adding to the discussion as to whether we need atmos or not. I'm an immersive artist/mixer and I have HUGE doubts. Regarding the mix buss conversation, he's not entirely right. Cubase/nuendo can easily create an immersive mix bus. Anyway ... I really appreciate this vid.
I also disagree about the stems comment at the end. A true immersive mix requires much more differentiation than what stems can provide.
On the other side of the coin ... the end-user side, Atmos is a bit of a tech and $$$ nightnare. Getting the tech right in the studio requires a LOT of dedication and attention to detail (which is always a good thing) .... but one small mistake on the tech side can be fatal. Let's not even talk about the binaural fold downs, as the Dolby binaural renderer (in my experience) can be a sonic nightmare.
IM A PROUDCER / ARTIST - I,VE HEARD ABOUT THIS ATMOS MIXING SHIT SO I WENT ON TO LISTEN TO SOME ATMOS MIX OF SOME BIG ARTIST #ITS THE WORST THING I,VE HEARD IN MY LIFE OF MUSIC . SAD BUT TRUE
We have two ears, we need two channels. Simple.
For stereo format I do like sacd in 24 bit 96 khz . The best to me.
Atmos the new quadraphonic.