I was listening to Elton John in Atmos, Rocket Man is breathtaking, mixed by Greg Penny. Listen to Greg break it down. Elton John tells Greg, "That’s it, I want my whole catalog in Atmos", after hearing that track. Listen to the interview here:
Immersive Audio and How to Achieve It
100% of music listeners prefer live music to recorded playback, why? A live performance "immerses" you and frees you up to move around the room, the dance floor and still be immersed. The goal posts have moved away from two speakers to an array of speakers all around as well as above you to reproduce the illusion of a LIVE performance. Why, in 2023, would anyone voluntarily use only two speakers to recreate this illusion of a live performance in a large room?
Even the artists themselves are using immersive audio in concert to WOW their audience, why not do it at home:
https://www.mixonline.com/live-sound/venues/on-the-cover-las-vegas-takes-immersive-live-part-1
134 responses Add your response
Another great album in Atmos is Chicago's Greatest Hits, not only are the horns more realistic, but depending on the song they can wrap around you like a horseshoe, as if you are in the studio. The only time you may hear something directly emanating from overhead on any of the tracks I played would be like the thunder in the beginning of Riders on the Storm by the Doors. | ||||
I gave "God Only Knows" a critical listen in Atmos. What I noticed was the very distinct and separate percussion section in the beginning of the song, the bells and wood blocks clearer and more distinct than I ever heard in a stereo mix. The richness in the vocals and then the highlight is the richness of the various voices singing the "god only knows" harmony in layer upon layer. That might have been where Giles introduced more of the height channels, as the vocal pitches go higher in scale he might have lifted or stacked the vocal objects higher in the mix but they never got higher than about a foot above my front speakers. Definitely a nice use of the sound stage though. Giles describes the Atmos mix better here: We can recreate that realism, if you like. That’s why I’m saying it’s not a psychedelic record—it’s a very real record. There’s the sound of air being pushed through lungs, and wind going through instruments. There’s a beauty to all of that. That "realism" is what I am describing as distinct and you REALLY notice it on vocals, that realism. | ||||
All I can say is the Atmos version of Per Sounds (I was just listening to God Only Knows yesterday) is much clearer than the stereo/hirez versions. I'll go back and listen to it again specifically for height channel stuff, yesterday what I noticed is the clarity and distinctness of the vocals. The atmos effect in my room is non localized, you don't hear the top speakers doing this and the surround speakers doing that. It is a coherent, distinct presentation that is simply more distinct. The tone of each instrument, the soft percussion instruments more distinct in their own space. Now you have me curious and I will give it another listen and post. | ||||
Just read the Giles Martin interview in the current issue of Sound and Vision, concerning his Atmos remastering of The Beach Boys Pet Sounds album, and specifically his comments about the song God Only Knows. I haven’t heard the outcome, so I reserve judgement, but he rather sheepishly admits that the height channels have no place in the song but he couldn’t resist the temptation to fiddle with them anyway. He makes it sound relatively unobtrusive, by his standards anyway, but it does make me uncomfortable with the whole process of introducing changes in a way that the original artist couldn’t conceive. Now perhaps the end result is worth it, and it isn’t like he permanently altered a master, as the two channel mix is still out there, but the gimmickry bothers me. | ||||
You are the DIY guy in this thread, the first thing I noticed on the BACCH website is licensing opportunity, care to weigh in please? It seems right in your wheelhouse of new technology, thanks.
Great review, but the $23K price of entry is steep . If you already have a two channel system and don't want all the complexity of a 7.2.4 system, this would be the way to go IMO, especially when this reviewer couldn't tell the difference between his $47K DAC and the BACCH unit with the $4K DAC upgrade: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/theoretica-applied-physics-bacch-sp-adio-stereo-purifier/ | ||||
All concepts of "immersiveness" , being it physical acoustic concept of small room , psycho-acoustic concept , and various dsp "immersive" system will all meet at one point and merge in some case... ... Here technology meet science and meet music experience in timbre and space...
Here a summary by Cambridge University : Immersive audio, capture, transport, and rendering: a review
And a thread here about one of the most important DSP the BACCH filters :
Acoustic is a science OVER debate between "purist stereo lover " as i am and Theater multichannel group lover " Soon there will be no more of these distinction... if i had money i would have bought The BACCH filters long time ago... I must wait... Anyway i just tried to upgrade my amplifier, and i was unsuccessful , just to realize that i am already in TOP AUDIOPHILE league with my 2 vintage well designed amplifier and headphone then i can wait a bit before going with Edgar Choueiri... 😁😊 Audio is about acoustic/psycho-acoustic not about the gear "per se" and it is about SYNERGY coupling... There is no debate between stereo lover and multichannel home theater, the science will erase it... It is already done anyway ...Choueiri is the leading authority ...
Here a doctorate thesis of a Choueiri Student and himself published this year : https://dataspace.princeton.edu/handle/88435/dsp01z029p801x
Here the abstract :
| ||||
Welcome to the forum and thanks for posting. As for this thread converting I don’t feel that is here or there. The INDUSTRY is not "converting", it converted already. When they showcased electric lights at the worlds fair did NYC or LA convert? Nope, that took decades. Heinz converted his factory to electric power 10 years before Ford did. The audio industry "converted" not when Atmos got invented, not when I bought an Atmos capable processor, but when Apple (about the largest company in the world by market cap) converted to spatial audio. Listen to producer Steve Wilson in this video at the :40 second mark: "It Suddenly Became All About Atmos" When I sit in my listening room for an Atmos session I turn down the lights and bring up Tidal Atmos playlists. Every time you see a song you know and love, regardless the artist or genre you get a pop of anticipation. There are NEW drops every week, like a "Tidal" wave that just keeps coming. You hit the play button on "Pet Sounds" or "Your Song" by Elton John, or "Landslide" or whatever and you wait. Nearly every time in my room the vocals just bring you closer to being in the studio than anything else. It doesn’t even have to be the main singer, with the Beach Boys it is the chorus, with Elton or Ella or Sting it is uniquely them. Instruments in the track that used to be just a blur in the background are now distinctly contributing in their own space (percussion instruments, horns, cymbals, etc). Horn sections are stunning in the distinctness and tone of each horn, in its own space. Sometimes a horn section can just mash together you know? I am posting what I like, that’s all. | ||||
The George Harrison Atmos remixes are breathtaking. When you hear George singing on "Give Me Love-(Give Me Peace on Earth)" it is like you never really heard him before. So close, so in the room with you, I think it is a combination of 21st century science resurrecting the original masters and then doing what object based audio does best, giving each sound a lifelike, textural quality in its own space, truly beautiful. 70's: Dolby Atmos on Tidal Playlist The George Harrison Catalog Available in Atmos: Dhani Harrison said, “22 years since his passing, for what would have been his 80th birthday, I am overjoyed to announce that we are bringing my father’s music catalogue back home to Dark Horse Records, the company he started back in 1974. We look forward to releasing only the finest of packages and hope the fans join us on the deepest of dives into our archives as we continue to grow his legacy through our partnership with BMG, starting with the release of his entire back catalog in Spatial Audio. | ||||
The Modern Rock Producer: Steve Wilson Interview: At :45 min in the video below, "listen to records the way you used to listen to records, the way you don’t anymore" on getting people together in a great atmos or acoustics room and taking them on a musical journey. He laments over the fact that most people don’t have a proper 7.1.4 atmos setup so he sets up listening sessions in studios just so people can here it "proper". Rick Beato Interviews Steve Wilson:
| ||||
Technically, to record at 128 discrete locations would require the mixer to combine them faithfully in, what, 128 to what power number of ways to choose from? When I see the high channel account I think that is for movie theaters. If you check out the thread I link to above it lays out how most mix studios are setup in a 7.2.4 format and the highest count they generally use is a 9.6.6 format. And even audiophiles to check out any and all latest technological developments that could prove beneficial. "Prove all things; hold fast to that which is good." This is why I think I adopted object based audio and not SACD, it was too expensive to buy new discs at $20-$50 a pop. Now, $ a month and you get everything? losless, hirez, and object based audio? Not being able to use it all is simply a waste if you are already paying for it in your subscription.
| ||||
Technically, to record at 128 discrete locations would require the mixer to combine them faithfully in, what, 128 to what power number of ways to choose from? And with how many intermediate audio components to decode? Or, without mixing, then with 128 channels and speakers to reproduce? More than there are persons in a full orchestra? (Put a mike on every violinist.) It just seems to me to be a lot of marketing beyond man’s capacity to handle and make sense of... so, if there was ever a time to KISS? On the other hand, I can certainly understand why persons without a system that provides adequate spatial realism would jump at any promises of possible improvement because they know their systems are lacking. And even audiophiles to check out any and all latest technological developments that could prove beneficial. "Prove all things; hold fast to that which is good." But I return to the point that all "stereo", preceded by whatever descriptive adjective above, still enters our senses in a stereo-solid two-ear configuration, attaining 3-D realism based on the distance between our ears and perceiving distance/depth by milliseconds of timing differences. That depth may be created via 128 channels or via a few milliseconds delay in a traditional stereo recording by the timing of the sound arriving at two-channel microphones. (Perhaps the biggest challenge in milliseconds/depth perception is that speakers' transient response still has the driver waiting to stop vibrating thereby masking the arrival of the secondary, tertiary sounds within the same few ms time span.) That we have our own sound decoders in our infinitely superior mental technology that can still sense almost immeasurable discrepancies between live and recorded sound will likely always be unmatchable by any human-made technology and may never be satisfied by all our feeble attempts. | ||||
My job was to evaluate new technology I can see your background in tech when you are dispensing advice in your posts, its very clear and articulate. I also see it in your room, its setup like an engineers space, with precision. So, remember Quadrophonic… four channel sound I want the Black Ice Audio F360 that has a Jim Fosgate design. It is today’s version of Quad, I could slide it right into my rack and connect the RCA outs to the RCA ins on my active speakers (the XLR ins are connected to my Marantz processor and I could toggle between both preamps). I can get it at a reasonable price, its all analog, tube based. See the Zeos review. "Quadraphonic is Back" here: So, multiple channels comes up again. In an object based format that is backward compatible with everything, yes. Which is fundamentally different than audio only at this time… if you are interested in high quality reproduction of music. At this time...2023? No, we can agree to disagree here. Atmos music and concerts on blueray are NOT Hollywood movie productions, in the least. Great, there are a few albums in Atmos that sound great on a mid-tier home theater system. Here I am confused, what albums and whose system? There are tons of great albums in Atmos on streaming services that sound fantastic on even budget systems according to the reviewers. This is Andrew Robinsons opinion of the Sony HT-A9 and I think this system would serve Joe Sixpack well: So what. I have access to millions of albums in red book CD quality and over half a million in high resolution formats that will sound better on a two channel audio system… by far. How can I argue what you have? It is a SOA two channel system, built by an expert in technology with a six figure budget. I got no beef and am thrilled for you. yes, I would very much enjoy a stereo that has been purpose built over years (decades) too, great job! What I am very concerned about is sending the message to folks that want a great music system into chasing a dream that is not there yet. I am very concerned that someone starting out today that has a budget (large or small) would waste it by building only half a system, a channel based one, and not be able to experience all that object based audio has to offer. If I really want to hear great immersive audio… music… and have $10K, $50K, or $200K, then home theater is not it. End of story. So, let me add to your opinion with facts, anyone wishing to experience GREAT immersive audio is invited to stop by my other thread on getting a proper setup and you can get started for under $2K and build a blow your sox off, SOA system for under $50K: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/how-to-setup-your-room-for-atmos-and-immersive-audio
| ||||
I am really happy that folks try to employ new technology to old problems. I am actually an early adopter, both in my personal life and professionally for over fifty years. My job was to evaluate new technology and to not adopt to early… or too late. To get technology that gained the most for a appropriate cost. When evaluating new technology you have to look at what the objectives are and the whole entire picture. So, remember Quadrophonic… four channel sound… they had some good demos and a few albums. But it died. It was too soon. So, multiple channels comes up again. It is absolutely spectacular for home theater. Which is fundamentally different than audio only at this time… if you are interested in high quality reproduction of music. The video distracts you from the nuances of the music. So, the sound quality is not as important. I have a great home theater system. It is great for home theater, but is completely inadequate compared to my 2 channel audio system. I am not saying that some day in the future the convergence of home theater and audio only will not happen, I am sure it will. But not for decades. Great, there are a few albums in Atmos that sound great on a mid-tier home theater system. So what. I have access to millions of albums in red book CD quality and over half a million in high resolution formats that will sound better on a two channel audio system… by far. What I am very concerned about is sending the message to folks that want a great music system into chasing a dream that is not there yet. If I really want to hear great immersive audio… music… and have $10K, $50K, or $200K, then home theater is not it. End of story.
If I want a home theater that sounds ok with just music… sometimes good, ok, your on. | ||||
Ok, fair enough. Then you are not an audiophile, or a person dedicated to high end audio. That makes you a normal person. Those of us that are tend to be solitary people that will do every thing possible to get the best possible sound… at the sweet spot. The sweet spot is assumed. Nothing wrong with having a good sounding system that everyone can enjoy… that makes you like most folks. The vast majority of people are not dedicated to the best sound possible. But your going to find those of us that are really dedicated to high sound quality here and on Audio Afficianado and a couple other forums. | ||||
Immersive audio is NOT surround sound, see: Audio Engineer Stan Kybert: So how does Dolby Atmos actually work? On a technical level, where stereo audio is limited to two channels of output, Atmos offers 128 discrete locations to send audio, which can move and alter at the mixer's requirements, utilising a connection to a supported DAW (Pro Tools, Logic, Ableton). While like 5.1 or 7.1 it uses a surrounding array of speakers for mixing, it doesn't suffer from the former's required numbers of speakers , and as a medium is adaptable to any system with Atmos technology installed. “It is so much more”, says Stan. “You might have a forward-facing Dolby Atmos mix - drums, bass and vocal - coming at you and then you'll maybe use the Atmos technology to wrap an orchestra around the listener. Or you have extra width. With stereo there is this trend to use wideners but with Atmos it can be as wide as you ever need it and as tall as you ever want it. “The tools that Atmos gives me in height, width, depth and sub are everything you need in comparison to stereo. In stereo you are always making sacrifices when mixing, like if you want to hear the guitar you may have to turn the Hammond down. You are constantly having to make decisions and carve out EQs in consideration of what other instrumentation is playing. You don’t need to do that in Atmos as there is enough space for everybody. The music is so dynamic, and it is such a joy to experience.”
| ||||
I think this comment of yours identifies the point of contention. Playing music and OK. The assumption that a home theater system will reproduce music as well, very few of us would agree with. I would say this is another point of contention. The content creators seem to feel that indeed, a "home theater" system can produce music beautifully. Look at the artists and engineers who have their feet in both worlds. Look at the AES event coming up next week on immersive audio: https://aes2.org/events-calendar/2023-aes-international-conference-on-spatial-and-immersive-audio/ The studios are converting to immersive audio in droves (because it sucks???): https://www.mixonline.com/tag/atmos Most of us want the very best audio playback possible. OK That requires the very highest quality and fewest components possible. That is exactly why the AES, Dolby, THX, etc. have standards. I have to agree with @mahgister that you have to start with acoustics first. Those of us that have, or tried both know that multichannel is highly compromised with respect to music… so, say for an investment level. I think you have another point of contention, Atmos/spatial audio/Sony 360 audio drops on Tidal and Apple music are snowballing because... ?? So, I am confused as to what the point is. My point is to not sink your budget into ONLY a channel based system , include BOTH a channel based AND an object based preamp/processor to enjoy ALL that the streaming services have to offer.
| ||||
I am skeptical of the value of having a sweet spot so minuscule that you cannot have more than one person enjoy a system. If only one seat lets the system sound right, you might as well use headphones and save on speakers. There is another limitation. Some live performances have musicians up in balconies behind the audience for dramatic effect. No multi-channel recordings duplicate this. | ||||
@kota1. “…I am in the camp that a good system can play music or movies, channel or object based audio…”
I think this comment of yours identifies the point of contention. Playing music and music by definition is a home theater system. The assumption that a home theater system will reproduce music as well, very few of us would agree with. Most of us want the very best audio playback possible. That requires the very highest quality and fewest components possible. Those of us that have, or tried both know that multichannel is highly compromised with respect to music… so, say for an investment level.
So what you are saying is you want an immersive home theater system. So, I am confused as to what the point is. | ||||
First of all thanks for your post, very articulate and welcome to the forum. There is nothing else besides stereo. uhhhh, what about the Beatles recording in mono BEFORE the albums were converted to stereo? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_in_Mono I read the article about the techie in Vegas & Santana Thank you. I just want to hear the musician, accurately, reproduced faithfully, in high fidelity. I agree. My first statement in the OP was a preference for live music over a recording. I learned some members prefer a CD over the actual live musician in your listening space, interesting.
| ||||
I said it but way less directly and clearly than you in my post above... Thanks to be right on the target and so concrete to be then understood by all...... There is as i said a precise rigorously defined concept of "immersiveness" in acoustic... I will cite my own post to complement your post :
I will only add that even spatialization as Timbre is constrained and created by our TWO ears/brain, and we can create it in an acoustically controlled room partially without DSP and without measures on our inner ear and pinnae and without HRTF measures, mechanically by modifying the zone pressures distribution in a small room and the balance and timing with incoming reflections.., It cannot be perfect doing so mechanicaklly but this give us an idea about the power of acoustic controls in a room...
«I don’t know what happens when we die, but maybe we go somewhere between 10^18 Hz and 10^43 Hz» Stuart Hameroff
https://twitter.com/StuartHameroff/status/1692253150093422799 | ||||
As I have read through the above posts it call goes back and forth somewhat comically to me. All immersive is stereo. Everything is stereo. There is nothing else besides stereo. Atmos cannot supercede stereo. Nothing else exists besides stereo. And because there was some debate above about whether anyone dare say 100%, I dare say everyone, i.e., 100% in this thread can only hear stereo, unless there is someone here that insists they have more than two ears, perhaps an extra ear on their back, their elbow or someplace. Stereo means two, as in two ears, two auditory senses. Our ears sense spatially and make other assessments based on milliseconds of timing, and so do are ears/mind assess accuracy, clarity, transparency, etc. that have little to do with the spatial issues Atmos makes a fortune over, or THX, or etc. I agree with the post above about the Oregon symphony: the tech-masters are messing up the natural, acoustic sounds rendered by musicians and their instruments, adding, in my opinion, purposeful distortion and dilution to the real performance. That’s a pity, and even though those on a tech-kick may get some juice out of the aural sensation, it won’t last because it isn’t the creative composition. Next, are the techies going to start calling themselves musicians? I read the article about the techie in Vegas & Santana. When the techie starts getting billed on the Vegas skyline billboards above the musicians-singers, then I may change my opinion. But as long as its the musician-singer I want to hear, then it’s not some techie who’s the maker-creator of music I want messing with my ears. I just want to hear the musician, accurately, reproduced faithfully, in high fidelity. Anything else, to me, is comical. | ||||
This seems like a discussion between a surround sound system vs 2 channel. Well it sounds that way, but not. Surround sound never stuck, DVD-A, SACD, never caught on and while better than redbook, SACD or DVD-A were more expensive than CD’s and most of the content was simply stereo recordings that were converted. It was also channel based.Atmos is object based, it sounds different than surround sound. Here is a video by engineer Steve Genewick from Capitol Studios that breaks it down. Steve has mixed tons of 2 channel stuff too: Usually, the sonic quality of 2 channel speakers are significantly better than the surround transducers. If you are talking dipoles yes, I agree. You have a good point too, if your speaker/amp budget is $25K do you divide it among two speakers and one two channel amp? You can get a killer stereo with that budget. Or, do you get a killer atmos setup like the one I link to below that can do reference level channel based audio AND MCH object based audio: For video surround, I’m going to try the Nakamishi Dragon 11.4.6 I think that’s fantastic, congrats! Atmos music will work with that setup. I consider video surround sound system (immersion from multiple speakers) a different goal separate from my 2 channel system (fidelity). I get that, I wasn’t convinced my surround processor could deliver great stereo until I did a side by side comparison with a reference level two channel preamp. Marantz rocks for my taste and budget on both atmos and stereo with my processor. On a side note most of us has spent considerable time, effort, deliberation, and resources to get to where we are today. You left out MONEY! Big money, into five figures, some members into six figures. This is where I see the fork in the road. Spending BIG money on a system that is only capable of channel based audio in 2023 is fine if you are NEVER going to be capable of trying new tech. I get that and I see the temples of audio in the virtual system area and when you got a six figure stereo, you are "good enough". I am not in that camp. I am in the camp that a good system can play music or movies, channel or object based audio, has LOT’s of available content on streaming services (atmos music is exploding in this regard thanks to Apple spatial audio), and is simple enough to use a kid can do it (Alexa, play Miles Davis in Dolby Atmos on Tidal, done). Very importantly, relative to 2 channel music, there is a very limited amount of audiophile level multichannel content available- perhaps I should have started with this. I have amazing news, all you need is atmos capable headphones to start, the content is quick, easy, and available on apple music or tidal. See: https://www.dolby.com/experience/headphones/
| ||||
This seems like a discussion between a surround sound system vs 2 channel.
It simply sounds better. Usually, the sonic quality of 2 channel speakers are significantly better than the surround transducers. Also, the cost to buy additional speakers, controllers, amplifiers try to reach the comparable sonic level is usually price prohibitive. Many value superior sonics more than surround sound immersion. it’s not one size fits all. Some 2 channel’s systems do not translate easily to a surround system: low powered tube amps, nearfield listening like with monitors, I consider video surround sound system (immersion from multiple speakers) a different goal separate from my 2 channel system (fidelity). Trying to accomplish both in a single system is usually cost prohibitive. I looked at several surround sound systems that can be in the ballpark of the fidelity of my speakers (which have Herculean dampening which isn’t inexpensive). The Perlisten surround will be ~$40k, then matching quality electronics and amps, makes this extremely cost prohibitive. Same with the YG surrounds. For video surround, I’m going to try the Nakamishi Dragon 11.4.6 . Fantastic reviews, and at $3.9k much more affordable route and it’s wireless - I don’t have to run wires. Pre-sales is sold out. On a side note most of us has spent considerable time, effort, deliberation, and resources to get to where we are today. Radical change to surround requires additional cost, time and effort for sonics that may be immersive surround but likely won’t match our subjective sonic level of high end audio is a risk few will take. Very importantly, relative to 2 channel music, there is a very limited amount of audiophile level multichannel content available- perhaps I should have started with this. | ||||
I think I’ll invest my ’entertainment $s’ at home....when ’we’ can drown the performers in sheer spl.... and you don’t have to travel, stand in line, and have people coughing on you LOL. Linkwitz once commented on ’ignoring the room’ with his dipoles in the 4 ’corners’; made a lot of sense to me, and still does. That is exactly what the new Sony HT-A9 does, 4 speakers and instead of dipoles they use proprietary tech to map the room. You can't replicate the "object based" experience with channels, no way, no how. For consumers to dump $$$$ into channel based tech without ever having compared to an object based experience is lunacy, given the growing amount of content available in apple music and tidal. Yes, object based has tradeoffs too, but the experience is stunning in my room, stunning!
| ||||
I do enjoy my music ’live, and in person’... ...until recently. 3 venues: In order, a symphony hall, a medium club, and a larger hall. The symphony: Not ghastly seats, but the performance came off as weak....in an acoustic level of quality....but an enthusiastic response from the audience, in a polite fashion (typ. for the crowd...) = 😎 The club: ’Meh’ acoustics, but they’ve been around long enough to play to the strengths of the venue....a rambunctious crowd that seemed to go off at a cough, not so much.... = 🤨 Larger hall: Loud lousy mix, and a crowd that was able to drown out the performance at will, and they definitely had enough of one. The performance and performers intrigued, but not enough to make me tolerate the audience.... = 😖 I think I’ll invest my ’entertainment $s’ at home....when ’we’ can drown the performers in sheer spl.... I’m out. ....and so much for ’live immersion’..... At home, be it ever so.... I can Immerse self easily, happily, and painlessly. Linkwitz once commented on ’ignoring the room’ with his dipoles in the 4 ’corners’; made a lot of sense to me, and still does. Esp. with omnis....such as the Walsh format, which Yes, one can play loud enough to thrill (or whatever you need to experience.....) with 2, L & R. Funny thing about them....4, L,R, F & R....’perceived loudness’ increases nicely, and doesn’t lead to frying the coils or creasing cones....or both. *S* This doesn’t mean that they’re the only things I listen to, no. But...they are the ones I prefer to do so. Surround myself....and give up. *L* Happily yours, J | ||||
So I dug into the "New Atmos Arrival" Playlist on Tidal tonight, the jaw dropping, face melting, heart stopping tracks (so far) which (if you have a system that is capable and a subscription) are: 1) Tubular Bells - Incredible 2) Let’s Stay Together- Al Green- Listening to this I understood why God gave us center channels. Anything less for Reverend Al is heresy. 3) Chicago- 25 or 6 to 4- OMG, the horns! Incredible depth, tone, separation, the guitar solo, beautiful. 4) God Only Knows- Beach Boys- The harmonies in stereo are a bit squished, in atmos, each voice as an object, breathing in their own distinct location, breathtaking. 5) Englishman in New York-Sting- The woodwinds, the strings, the tone, it is like you never heard it before. 6) Linus and Lucy- Vince Guaraldi- The piano, crystal clear in the soundstage but the percussion, WOW, its like you never noticed it until now. New drops by the Stones, Pink Floyd. McCartney, Clapton, Luther Van Ross, and sooo many other. Oh yeah, Sinatra, incredible, breathtaking, dare I say...priceless?? Link to the Tidal playlist: https://tidal.com/browse/playlist/842c6d95-a332-48dc-af28-92c573bd4fdc
| ||||
| Post removed | ||||
@kota1 ....*L* True....The Martha would have your 'cloud' in a pleasant color, spruced up to resemble a cloud....vanishing into a ceiling of textural reference.... (I still wonder what goes down when Snoop Dog hangs with Da Martha....) Inhalation Therapy? 😎🙄😆... "...you might see me tonight with an illegal smile....it don't cost all that much, but it lasts a good while..." *cough* | ||||
Headphones are like underwear, gloves (for general 'rough duty' stuff), and tools of various sorts...very much like ones' prefs in speakers and that in front of them. Hard to sort through all the offerings....word of mouth or forums, since previews are hard to come by, the actual wear and Listen with.... Sweetwater is the only b&m that I'm aware of that has a 'wall of phones' to 'browse', but requires the jaunt to do so... I settled on V-Moda M-100 Crossfades....studio stuff, but comfy....corded, but plugs into either cup. *S* One still misses the 'feel' of the bass lines tho'....at least, one doesn't have to pay big bucks to swap them out for the 'next better thing' (one hopes....) | ||||
I’ve been playing music professionally for decades and have also spent many years as an overpaid live sound system designer and mixer. Thank so much for joining this thread. Must be a fun way to make a living! The link in my OP was specifically about live performances at Vegas residencies. There’s always a lot of pseudo cerebral blathering about surround being "more real" but do you want Miles playing to the back of your head? Kind of Blue in Atmos is available on Tidal and Atmos music, highly recommended, see "Stunningly Good in Atmos" below: https://www.soundandvision.com/content/miles-davis-gets-re-mixed-dolby-atmos
| ||||
I’ve been playing music professionally for decades and have also spent many years as an overpaid live sound system designer and mixer. I’ll wait for the applause to die down...OK then...note that nearly zero live systems are stereo mixes because that would leave people on either side of the venue hearing a weird mix. I’ve successfully used lightly applied stereo reverb at live shows but that’s it. Something about live music makes this work well regardless of the type of music because the essence of live music is the energy or general vibe of the performer (s) plus the feel of the venue. There’s always a lot of pseudo cerebral blathering about surround being "more real" but do you want Miles playing to the back of your head? Maybe you do...I don’t use room conditioning because musical performance generally takes place in rooms and who am I to deny my great sounding room to these artists? More applause...really...thank you very much. | ||||
@kota1 I don’t disagree with you at all. The sound cloud would of course help and the center speaker would be great also. What you just dont seem to take into consideration is that everyone’s system is designed by them for them and their intended use or familes use. Your ideas are great for someone who wants the same thing as you but not so great for others. I could have a dedicated sound room and an Atmos system if I wanted one, but my intent with my system is to integrate it into our daily lives. Its a family room ,and as such its where all thing’s family take place and most of the time there is music involved. TV,s not even connected to the music system at all , theres a modest sound bar mounted underneath. Everythings thought out for us , and so as is the way with one size fits all things ,compromise is necessary. Im not trying to be a Richard but seems to me that there’s gotta be boards out there where the members have interests more in line with yours. I’ve only been a member and posting here for a few years even though Id snoop around sometimes before that, but I always thought Agon was just a for dinosaurs old school two channel forum, of course I could be mistaken and apologize if so.Your ideas are great I’m sure for people interested in exactly the same things you are, and this dinosaurs not interested in the consumer electronics industries latest iteration of Qudraphonic, did that already back in the late 70,s btw. | ||||
It is better if you read what it is first...
Read that and you could decide after ..
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/theoretica-applied-physics-bacch-sp-adio-stereo-purifier/ https://research.princeton.edu/news/edgar-choueiri-bacchtm-3d-sound https://www.theoretica.us/index.html
This discovery eclipse all other audio gear news...Because it is an application of fundamental acoustic , not a new electrical gear design for a mere dac or multichannels etc ... But very vew people spoke about it in audio forums...
| ||||
Perfect, you will be very astounded...Read about Choueri , it is really a genius in audio...
For the headphone, you will not like it... This is an old headphone, AKG K340 , he aged not well... And i make modifications to it...But you can buy it for peanuts then , dont be angry at me if you dont like it... 😁 For me it is my favorite... And i did not like it so much the first day... It takes me 6 months to optimize it... buy a contemporary headphone , a top one.... budget seems not for you a problem as it is for me... 😊 By the way i take a plunge, and buy the microzotl 2 as pre-amp for my Sansui AU 7700 to serve my headphone...
| ||||
All speakers and audio systems in the world sound veiled and bright that includes $100k cd player, $million speakers, $100k power amp, $20k power cords, etc. Agreed, that doesn't mean I don't like them, just not as much as live music. If I could have Norah Jones or Billy Joel at the piano in my living room or a CD you know which one I (but not everyone apparently) would choose. The sounds of surround receivers are not good and can't compete to the sound of a good stereo amp. My Onkyo receiver sounds "good" but my Carver amp is in another league, agreed. BUT, the gap is getting narrower every year. 2 channel set up is easier to make smoother musical sound and better for long term listening music. I can't disagree, you can see my desktop system and my home theater, no question my desktop system was easier and still sounds quite satisfying for casual listening.
| ||||
All speakers and audio systems in the world sound veiled and bright that includes $100k cd player, $million speakers, $100k power amp, $20k power cords, etc. The sounds of surround receivers are not good and can't compete to the sound of a good stereo amp. Also, sounds from many inferior surround speakers are even worse. All these bad sounds from many inferior speakers are directed to a listening chair in the center. It can be something special for a short time but ears will be tired soon. 2 channel set up is easier to make smoother musical sound and better for long term listening music. Alex/Wavetouch |
