The new immersion processes are NOT "surround" sound. Surround sound was based on channels and many people who have not adopted immersive audio dismiss it because of their misunderstanding about "object based" audio.
Immersive audio is new and still finding its way. When I decided to adopt immersive audio I took the same care in speaker selection that I did with two channel. If I wouldn't use a speaker in my immersive audio setup for two channel I wouldn't use it as a surround speaker. Dolby has specs available for speaker setup. I followed them and chose to use front and rear height channels using bookshelves. Simple, you can aim them at the sweetspot. It made no sense to me to use the speakers that bounce off the ceiling or drill holes in my ceiling to have speakers aimed at the floor. The floor is not a sweet spot. Once setup properly immersive audio is breathtaking. I still listen to two channel at low to moderate levels on some content, mostly in the morning with my coffee. But if you want to replicate a live music experience immersive is much more lifelike than aiming a pair of speakers at your head.
I encourage you to check out the threads I started here on atmos. One is how to setup an atmos system based on dolby specs. The second is on atmos music.
|
If you are thinking about setting up an atmos system make sure to check out this thread:
|
I find Sony 360 a headphone based upmixer and use it with my Tidal subscription. I wouldn't build a home theater around it though.
|
Neither.
Turn on my Symphonic cd, tape, radio all in one unit. Two simulated wood speakers. It’s actually cardboard. But 2 way!! Turn off the lights, hit play, recline my chair and enjoy.
But I should really upgrade the power cable.
I would post a picture in Virtural System, but I don't want to brag.
|
Sorry Kota but yes, Atmos is a type of surround sound. It may be now considered "next generation" and far more compute and software intensive than the previous generation of discrete digital or analog formats but it's very much a type of surround sound.
|
Given this is a 2 channel forum, my thoughts are that object-oriented sounds don't really lend themselves to any type of purity testing.
Consider for instance a close-miked guitar that you put into an immersive audio recording. Well, now you don't have a specific L, R or even S recording of that guitar. You have a guitar recording which can be placed anywhere in the sound field, and whose exact bit shape will vary from system to system. Seems wrong for music, but probably good for live music reproduction, when trying to capture an auditorium, but seriously, those types of features have come and gone from many vendors. 2 channel stereo has never been shaken.
|
Should also point out that Dolby is, by-and-large, in the special effects business. Their business model is to over saturate the senses, not to bring realism.
Not saying it's bad, but two-channel stereo listeners are looking for fundamentally different things than an action director or cinematographer want to bring to your living room. I'm sure there will be a handful of Atmos music videos, and that's all they'll be.
|
but two-channel stereo listeners are looking for fundamentally different things than an action director or cinematographer
There are no "two channel stereo listeners", there are only "music listeners".
There are "two channel music creators", the mixing and mastering engineers. Can you sing in two channels? Nope, the engineer needs to mix it that way.
“We’ve been waiting for a replacement for stereo for decades,” says Jan 'Stan' Kybert, the engineer responsible for installing the Dean St. Studios facility. “It’s an ancient technology. With music you want to feel something, like with a Saturday night or Sunday morning record. They make me feel ‘Saturday night’ or ‘Sunday morning’. That feeling has been lost with stereo now, and it’s not stereo’s fault, but with Dolby Atmos that feeling is there. It’s bigger, more exciting and wants to make you move, be more intimate, more relaxed or whatever. Everything it does it does it on a richer level.
Check out:
|
This isn't a codec, its a movement and dolby atmos is being adopted by the music creation community:
|
If you are spending $$$ on two channel stereo it is like investing in buggy whips. Yes, you will have a great buggy whip but in five years you will need to invest in Atmos if you want the best streaming experience available. When Apple started offering Atmos the industry changed overnight.
The good news is Atmos is backward compatible, Atmos sounds great through two speakers or headphones. Objects sound different than channels even through two speakers.
|
Surround sound is for adults who still pine for Disney World.
|
... When Apple started offering Atmos the industry changed overnight ...
You're joking, right?
|
Stereo sound is for senior citizens who still pine for their 8 track tapes.
|
@cleeds
You're joking, right?
Fact:
|
You’ve bought into the hype machine. Youtube is filled with stuff like this. Excited, breathless, animated and silly. Atmos is probably good for movies, though.
|
|
The Comfortably Numb Dolby Atmos rendition on BluRay doesn't suck.
|
All HT is really kind of a mess. The vast majority of buyers of TV’s and music still want zero more speakers or 2. The number of speakers required, extra hardware, wiring, etc. makes it a very unappealing add-in for most homeowners.
I mean, yeah, I have a HT receiver and an integrated in my living room, but of my neighbors 100% of the rest of them have just a TV with TV speakers built in and some portable Bluetooth speakers.
We’ve been through this before with Dolby Pro Logic. There was a rush to convert brands from stereo to 100% HT which ended up being the wrong way to go. It also became prohibitively expensive, I suspect due to the HDMI licensing and copy protection issues, though HDMI came after HT. It seems to have paralyzed Theta Digital for a few years.
Don’t get me wrong, I love HT and it’s technology for movies but in terms of 5.1 or more speakers it is an absolutely niche market compared to 2 channel music systems.
|
@erik_squires
Atmos sounds fine through two speakers, I don't see why you can't have both? I have a very nice DAC for streaming stereo, I can upmix to Dolby Surround if I want.
I have a very nice processor for Atmos, I can play Atmos mix through two speakers if I want.
|
BTW, the most immersive system I ever had was a 5.1 and what made it sound like you were absolutely engulfed in the sound field wasn't more speakers but ceiling treatment.
|
+1 on ceiling treatment, look at the pics in my virtual system, I have absorbers in the front. a combo diffuser/bass trap above the MLP, and an acoustic "cloud" near the back.
|
I think the adoption of immersive audio formats is tightly linked to the effect of critical mass. Critical mass of records. Critical mass of gear.
Indeed, listening to a well-mixed Dolby Atmos record through an audio system built to Dolby specs is very pleasant, and in some ways superior to stereo experience on any system imaginable. Like Sergeant Pepper's I once heard at Dolby headquarters.
Still, even though I have a decent Dolby Atmos system at home, most of records I like listening to are still in stereo, and most of those are not likely to ever be remixed.
I tend to think that online audio suppressed the timely adoption of physical multi-channel audio media, such as SACD. Just when SACD hobby were becoming interesting, the ability to listen to almost any stereo-recorded music mankind ever produced, for a reasonable fee, overrode the enjoyment derived from a limited selection of SACD records.
|
