|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jan 5, 2024 15:14:12 GMT -5
I would like to take a step back and reiterate why “vinyl sucks”. I put the thread title back into quotes, because we know that Andrew R is immediately hinting at more than just audio quality, for better or worse. Somehow, it’s never ignored. It’s always glazed over….. and never emphasized enough. Full length, live show performance rules……. Game over end of story Nobody goes to a live performance, then gets up every 10 minutes or so disturb everyone around them, runs up to the stage and flips the performers upside down, runs back to their seat, disturbs everyone again and then 10 minutes later repeats the whole freaking process. There is one guy I do know who does that and gets away with it and he’s even got a video out there posted it below for all to see. youtu.be/zy8W2w9IV-I?si=d2FLpmgQrZ0P3OrV |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2024 15:21:45 GMT -5
I never said analog was superior. Simply that it didn't die that long ago. Not sure why you bring up Atmos, but how can you listen to a Atmos mix without Atmos processing? www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fwMneAnfycAtmos was meant for movies, not music. Taking a stereo mix and butchering it to Atmos is not an improvement. Now, if the artist and audio engineer planned and recorded an Atmos album, then that would be different, but has anyone actually done that? I'll try and say my point in a different way, but this will be my last attempt. If you can't comprehend it, then that is on you. Analog mixes were recorded in a specific way. It was limited to the master tape, but audio engineers had a talent that no longer exists today. Go watch Sound City. When modern remasters simply make something louder, it can be butchered and suck. I can't find a source atm, but I've read that many remasters also go back to early digital sources, and rarely go back to the master tapes. That just cost too much. So the best sources of older music recorded in analog are older analog sources (vinyl and tape) and possibly early CDs that didn't suck. If you like the loudness wars and don't care, go for it, but IMO it's gotten out of hand. If you want to hear the way it was originally mixed and care about the art of album mastering, then old analog sources or early CDs it is. A few AAD CDs did sound good, but many were also horrible. This is obviously for older music, or anything recorded at Sound City before they closed. There are some issues translating old analog tape masters to modern reproduction. Remastering has been done for decades with variable success. Some remasters are excellent, so it can be done. ATMOS is meant for sound. It doesn’t matter if it’s a movie or music. BTW, a lot of music today is movie soundtracks. Two very good ATMOS music discs that I have are remasters from analog tape. One is the recent ATMOS remaster of Pink Floyd’s DSOTM. The second is a remaster of Beethoven’s 9 Symphonies conducted by Herbert Von Karajan on DG. The Beethoven symphonies were recorded between 1975-1977. DSOTM is older. These two are just a sample of what is in my library. I have many modern digital recordings that were made in various multi-channel formats; including ATMOS. Most are excellent recordings. If there is push to do music in ATMOS, it makes me happy; whether it’s remasters from old analog tape, or new digital recordings. Some sources for multi-channel music, including ATMOS: www.pureaudio-bluray.com/trptk.com/shop/immersiveaudioalbum.com/superdeluxeedition.com/?s=ATMOS&button=In the “ATMOS doesn’t make sense” video, Josh Seawell is making sense. Josh’s major points are cost/benefit, financial risk to small businesses, making a coherent soundfield in a room, confusing messaging. The large distribution players in the business want to pass the costs to the smaller content creation players. Confusing messaging - good chapter - is part of a Financial Plan. Josh is trying to give good advice to folks who have or want to build a small sound studio - Advice that will help then financially succeed. ATMOS makes Very Good Sense for music. There has hardly been a ‘push’ toward ATMOS. There has been reluctance to accept it because of infrastructure cost, learning curve, and gatekeeping. The Big Dogs eat the small dogs for sport. The Big Dogs want all the money. The first three comments at the video are good. ~~~ Just two cents worth of comment from an old retired audio professional… I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jan 5, 2024 16:03:30 GMT -5
With static control accessories you want a relatively high bulk resistance... The problem is that many things can build up a quite impressive static charge. This is why, for example, after you walk across a carpet, then touch something grounded, you can sometimes generate a really impressive spark. The goal of "antistatic protection" is to drain the charge off somewhat gradually, then continue to drain it off, so new charge doesn't build up. The carbon content in LPs, or car tires, has very little conductivity... but it has some. According to some claims, when car tires were originally tried out of pure rubber, they could occasionally allow life-threatening amounts of charge to build up. (Some moving parts, including the fan belt, would build up charge, and the tires would insulate the car, causing the entire car to charge up like a capacitor.) So a typical modern car tire is "a pretty good insulator" but is still conductive enough that charge will eventually bleed off rather than build up. I would, however, challenge your statement that "at 25 kV everything is a conductor"... The reality is that some things are very good insulators... even at incredibly high voltages. Back when glass-in-oil capacitors were common the larger high voltage ones were routinely stored with their contacts shorted. The reason was that, if they were not, air blowing across the terminals could build up a charge over time... And, since those capacitors had near-perfect insulation, that charge could actually reach potentially lethal levels over long periods of time... And, yes, both glass, and some pure plastics, are exceptionally good insulators... Another issue is that friction, especially between certain materials, CREATES static charge... For example, plastic shoe soles on a wool carpet, or wool clothing sliding across a nylon upholstered car seat... Or maybe a stylus moving across a record's surface... or a drive belt moving against a platter... Many years ago I had an electrostatic generator that could jump pretty impressive sparks... well over two inches long... That charge was created by a fat rubber band rotating around a pulley covered with a layer of wool yarn... The potential problems with Sorbothane are not specifically related to the Sorbothane itself deteriorating. The problem is that Sorbothane contains "plasticizers" that can and will "migrate" under certain circumstances... The reason Sorbothane will stain porous wood is that some of the chemicals migrate from the plastic into the wood. And, specifically, these tend to include the chemicals that "make the plastic squishy and keep it that way". It is certainly possible that, after a very long period of gradual loss, the loss of these materials might render the Sorbothane hard or brittle... HOWEVER the real concern is that even small quantities migrating into the surface of a vinyl album might alter the properties of that surface. Albums actually experience an amazing amount of force where the stylus contacts the grooves... And the vinyl has a specific combination of properties that allow it to flex and return to its proper shape extremely well... Therefore the possibility that even a small amount of plasticizer from the Sorbothane might migrate into the vinyl and alter its properties poses a major risk... (I don't know if this has ever been tested or documented.. but I would prefer NOT to be the one doing so with albums I cared about.) I owned a Rega turntable some time ago and I thought it was quite nice. HOWEVER, the fact that the glass platter rings, even with Sorbothane on it, strongly suggests that glass was NOT a great choice for a platter material. (Many older turntables had metal platters, which would obviously ring rather strongly on their own, but which were apparently rather easily damped. ) I’ve been meaning to retry the different mats I have. It’s been a while. I can do VTA adjust on the fly with my Grado Signature arm, and compensate for mat thickness. The Rega has a plastic spindle and integrated plastic pulley. No current path there. I know there are metal upgrades, but still no current path from metal spindle through a MDF base. No current path in most turntables from spindle to ground regardless of platter and spindle composition. The grounded brush on a Shure V15 cartridge was a good idea but had its own secondary sound problems. I was kind of miffed when Shure sold its last V15 type 5 stock to the Library of Congress – the result was I couldn’t replace my ‘relatively’ inexpensive stylus. The D'stat II mat has to have some distributed bulk resistance to be effective. Since an LP can carry a local charge, the carbon in the LP can’t produce much conductivity. I thought the carbon black was mostly for consistent color – cosmetic. Looking at a black LP under black light is interesting. Besides, everything is a conductor with a 25Kv charge on it. I have a Zero-Stat pistol too. It sits in the box. I had an Oracle turntable before the Rega. It came with a sorbothane mat and screw clamp. The Rega is almost as good without the finicky nature of the Oracle; and a lot less expensive. I see your potential problems with sorbothane mats. I see little deterioration in my sorbothane mats, and no residue left on any LPs. My Oracle Groove Isolator sorbothane mat is still new in the container – almost 40 years old. Occassionally I wash the platter and Audioquest sorbothane mat with plain warm water and dry the thing with a flour sack towel. I do wonder if the platter/LP interface would be just as good with a felt mat… The glass Rega platter has a ring to it even with the sorbothane mat. These days, I play LPs dry with no additional cleaning other than a carbon fiber brush, and a small soft brush to remove fuzz from the stylus. I don’t miss the rest of the ritual and it keeps things simple. No worries… |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2024 16:15:21 GMT -5
A more simple anti static device is a humidifier in the winter time. Not only great for vinyl playback, but for your lungs and overall health during the dry cold months.
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 5, 2024 16:36:30 GMT -5
There are some issues translating old analog tape masters to modern reproduction. Remastering has been done for decades with variable success. Some remasters are excellent, so it can be done. ATMOS is meant for sound. It doesn’t matter if it’s a movie or music. BTW, a lot of music today is movie soundtracks. Two very good ATMOS music discs that I have are remasters from analog tape. One is the recent ATMOS remaster of Pink Floyd’s DSOTM. The second is a remaster of Beethoven’s 9 Symphonies conducted by Herbert Von Karajan on DG. The Beethoven symphonies were recorded between 1975-1977. DSOTM is older. These two are just a sample of what is in my library. I have many modern digital recordings that were made in various multi-channel formats; including ATMOS. Most are excellent recordings. If there is push to do music in ATMOS, it makes me happy; whether it’s remasters from old analog tape, or new digital recordings. Some sources for multi-channel music, including ATMOS: www.pureaudio-bluray.com/trptk.com/shop/immersiveaudioalbum.com/superdeluxeedition.com/?s=ATMOS&button=In the “ATMOS doesn’t make sense” video, Josh Seawell is making sense. Josh’s major points are cost/benefit, financial risk to small businesses, making a coherent soundfield in a room, confusing messaging. The large distribution players in the business want to pass the costs to the smaller content creation players. Confusing messaging - good chapter - is part of a Financial Plan. Josh is trying to give good advice to folks who have or want to build a small sound studio - Advice that will help then financially succeed. ATMOS makes Very Good Sense for music. There has hardly been a ‘push’ toward ATMOS. There has been reluctance to accept it because of infrastructure cost, learning curve, and gatekeeping. The Big Dogs eat the small dogs for sport. The Big Dogs want all the money. The first three comments at the video are good. ~~~ Just two cents worth of comment from an old retired audio professional… I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. I gave you links. Search them. You have a lot of opinions about things you know little about. It's ok. We all have some. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2024 16:50:21 GMT -5
I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. I gave you links. Search them. You have a lot of opinions about things you know little about. It's ok. We all have some. It's not that I know little about it. I'm thinking more along the lines of convincing that mass public that it is worth upgrading it. Also, from an audio fan myself, I'm not sold. I was excited at first, in the theater realm, but I don't think my state has a single Dolby Atmos theater. You don't have to sell me, just millions of others to spend hard earned money to buy into a new format. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 5, 2024 17:04:17 GMT -5
I gave you links. Search them. You have a lot of opinions about things you know little about. It's ok. We all have some. Turner - It's not that I know little about it. I'm thinking more along the lines of convincing that mass public that it is worth upgrading it. Also, from an audio fan myself, I'm not sold. I was excited at first, in the theater realm, but I don't think my state has a single Dolby Atmos theater. You don't have to sell me, just millions of others to spend hard earned money to buy into a new format. I have no interest in selling anything. I have no time or energy to convince people to be interested in my interests. Audio was my profession. Audio and HT is a hobby. I like to share and talk about it. I do that locally and at various internet forums. The public can choose whatever it wants. There are as many different interesting things to do as there are people. |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on Jan 5, 2024 17:15:01 GMT -5
To be quite honest I personally like Atmos for MOVIES but don't find it to be especially compelling for music. Much as, while it seems like a cool idea, when I listen to a concert I WANT to hear it as I would if I were sitting in the front row. I have no desire to hear it as if I was sitting in the middle of the band with the instruments around me. And, while having the proper amount of room ambience is important for live recordings, that ambience doesn't have to be especially precise. (But I know several people who do very much like surround sound music.) There is one thing worth thinking about when it comes to surround sound and "immersive audio" like Atmos... Many live and classical recordings are recorded with relatively few microphones... usually a few across the front and a few above or behind for "ambience". These can then be reproduced quite well using a pair of main front speakers for stereo... Or we can add a pair or two of surrounds to reproduce the "room ambience"... And perhaps a center channel up front to help "pin the center to the center when you move around the room". However, with a recording like that, Atmos doesn't have much more to offer... You could add a pair of microphones up high, and send those channels to a pair of height speakers, to get "more of a sense of height"... But, to be honest, I'm not sure exactly how much benefit you would get by doing so... Without getting into technical terms the MAIN benefit of Dolby Atmos is the flexibility it gives the mixing engineer... When you master something in Atmos, rather than "just put each track in a channel" you have the opportunity to "put each track in its own OBJECT". Then, whereas the tracks are pretty much stuck in place, you can move each of those objects around at will... This is incredibly powerful when you're doing sound for a movie... and you want the sound of the helicopter to track the helicopter's location...
Or where you have a crowd scene and you really are going to be "building the acoustic space by placing each person's voice where it belongs".BUT, to be quite blunt, it would be of rather limited use in a recording of a symphony orchestra... It's a fair guess that none of the instruments in the orchestra will be zooming back and forth or doing loop-de-loops overhead... And, in the end, you do only have tow ears (at least that's true for most of us). Therefore you gain very little by being able to assign each instrument to a separate object and place each one independently. And, with a small chamber ensemble, odds are everyone is sitting in a chair, in one spot, for the entire performance. And, even with a rock band, where maybe the lead vocalist, and one or two guitars, do move around a bit... That level of "localization" could be handled quite adequately with a pair of stereo speakers or plain old surround. I would even go so far as to suggest that Dolby Atmos is a MASTERING format... (Or "a creation and delivery format"...) But it is NOT particularly a RECORDING format... I would expect that, in most cases, an "Atmos recording" will be made the same way as any other recording... With each instrument or performer recorded in their own track... (At most you might record a few extra tracks specifically because you expect to want them later.... to "build your background".) It is the MIXING process where those tracks will be made into either "a stereo recording", or "a surround sound recording", or "an Atmos recording". I think you also need to consider the fine distinction between "pull", "push", and "demand". For example many of the people I speak to every day have a surround sound system and have no plans to upgrade to an Atmos system... Yet, when we introduce a new product, there is very little market these days for "a plain old 5.1 or 7.1 channel system". EVERYBODY wants a system that is capable of doing Atmos... either because they want it today... or "in case they decide to upgrade later". Likewise, given the choice, when buying movies, most of us would choose "the Atmos versions" instead of "the plain 5.1 or 7.1 channel versions". The reason is that there is nothing to lose by doing so... Those "Atmos discs" will play perfectly in any 5.1 or 7.1 channel system... And, if and when we do decide to upgrade to Atmos, we'll already have our movie collection... (Rather than be faced with the prospect of buying newer updated copies of our favorite movies.) ........................................ I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 5, 2024 17:50:17 GMT -5
To be quite honest I personally like Atmos for MOVIES but don't find it to be especially compelling for music. Much as, while it seems like a cool idea, when I listen to a concert I WANT to hear it as I would if I were sitting in the front row. I have no desire to hear it as if I was sitting in the middle of the band with the instruments around me. And, while having the proper amount of room ambience is important for live recordings, that ambience doesn't have to be especially precise. (But I know several people who do very much like surround sound music.) There is one thing worth thinking about when it comes to surround sound and "immersive audio" like Atmos... Many live and classical recordings are recorded with relatively few microphones... usually a few across the front and a few above or behind for "ambience". These can then be reproduced quite well using a pair of main front speakers for stereo... Or we can add a pair or two of surrounds to reproduce the "room ambience"... And perhaps a center channel up front to help "pin the center to the center when you move around the room". However, with a recording like that, Atmos doesn't have much more to offer... You could add a pair of microphones up high, and send those channels to a pair of height speakers, to get "more of a sense of height"... But, to be honest, I'm not sure exactly how much benefit you would get by doing so... Without getting into technical terms the MAIN benefit of Dolby Atmos is the flexibility it gives the mixing engineer... When you master something in Atmos, rather than "just put each track in a channel" you have the opportunity to "put each track in its own OBJECT". Then, whereas the tracks are pretty much stuck in place, you can move each of those objects around at will... This is incredibly powerful when you're doing sound for a movie... and you want the sound of the helicopter to track the helicopter's location...
Or where you have a crowd scene and you really are going to be "building the acoustic space by placing each person's voice where it belongs".BUT, to be quite blunt, it would be of rather limited use in a recording of a symphony orchestra... It's a fair guess that none of the instruments in the orchestra will be zooming back and forth or doing loop-de-loops overhead... And, in the end, you do only have tow ears (at least that's true for most of us). Therefore you gain very little by being able to assign each instrument to a separate object and place each one independently. And, with a small chamber ensemble, odds are everyone is sitting in a chair, in one spot, for the entire performance. And, even with a rock band, where maybe the lead vocalist, and one or two guitars, do move around a bit... That level of "localization" could be handled quite adequately with a pair of stereo speakers or plain old surround. I would even go so far as to suggest that Dolby Atmos is a MASTERING format... (Or "a creation and delivery format"...) But it is NOT particularly a RECORDING format... I would expect that, in most cases, an "Atmos recording" will be made the same way as any other recording... With each instrument or performer recorded in their own track... (At most you might record a few extra tracks specifically because you expect to want them later.... to "build your background".) It is the MIXING process where those tracks will be made into either "a stereo recording", or "a surround sound recording", or "an Atmos recording". I think you also need to consider the fine distinction between "pull", "push", and "demand". For example many of the people I speak to every day have a surround sound system and have no plans to upgrade to an Atmos system... Yet, when we introduce a new product, there is very little market these days for "a plain old 5.1 or 7.1 channel system". EVERYBODY wants a system that is capable of doing Atmos... either because they want it today... or "in case they decide to upgrade later". Likewise, given the choice, when buying movies, most of us would choose "the Atmos versions" instead of "the plain 5.1 or 7.1 channel versions". The reason is that there is nothing to lose by doing so... Those "Atmos discs" will play perfectly in any 5.1 or 7.1 channel system... And, if and when we do decide to upgrade to Atmos, we'll already have our movie collection... (Rather than be faced with the prospect of buying newer updated copies of our favorite movies.) I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. Acoustic musical events are not the same as moving generated movie effects or moving effects in electronic music. This does not mean that additional channels - including height channels - have limited use. The additional channels help define the recording space of an acoustical event. It's not about doing "loop-de-loops overhead...", or around the room. It helps make the home listening space disappear into the recording space. That is the Object.  I have a Holophone Mic recording that demos this very well. It was made in 2002; Long before ATMOS. I also have a few acoustic ATMOS music recordings that do the same thing. ATMOS isn't just for loop-de-loops. There is an object lesson here. A pinned 'Object' is still an 'Object'. A pinned 'Object' is also a 'Channel'. The tool can be used as desired and required. I prefer the center loge bridge at concerts. The back wave bounces off the back wall and returns to the center loge seats from above and below. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2024 17:51:53 GMT -5
To be quite honest I personally like Atmos for MOVIES but don't find it to be especially compelling for music. Much as, while it seems like a cool idea, when I listen to a concert I WANT to hear it as I would if I were sitting in the front row. I have no desire to hear it as if I was sitting in the middle of the band with the instruments around me. And, while having the proper amount of room ambience is important for live recordings, that ambience doesn't have to be especially precise. (But I know several people who do very much like surround sound music.) There is one thing worth thinking about when it comes to surround sound and "immersive audio" like Atmos... Many live and classical recordings are recorded with relatively few microphones... usually a few across the front and a few above or behind for "ambience". These can then be reproduced quite well using a pair of main front speakers for stereo... Or we can add a pair or two of surrounds to reproduce the "room ambience"... And perhaps a center channel up front to help "pin the center to the center when you move around the room". However, with a recording like that, Atmos doesn't have much more to offer... You could add a pair of microphones up high, and send those channels to a pair of height speakers, to get "more of a sense of height"... But, to be honest, I'm not sure exactly how much benefit you would get by doing so... Without getting into technical terms the MAIN benefit of Dolby Atmos is the flexibility it gives the mixing engineer... When you master something in Atmos, rather than "just put each track in a channel" you have the opportunity to "put each track in its own OBJECT". Then, whereas the tracks are pretty much stuck in place, you can move each of those objects around at will... This is incredibly powerful when you're doing sound for a movie... and you want the sound of the helicopter to track the helicopter's location...
Or where you have a crowd scene and you really are going to be "building the acoustic space by placing each person's voice where it belongs".BUT, to be quite blunt, it would be of rather limited use in a recording of a symphony orchestra... It's a fair guess that none of the instruments in the orchestra will be zooming back and forth or doing loop-de-loops overhead... And, in the end, you do only have tow ears (at least that's true for most of us). Therefore you gain very little by being able to assign each instrument to a separate object and place each one independently. And, with a small chamber ensemble, odds are everyone is sitting in a chair, in one spot, for the entire performance. And, even with a rock band, where maybe the lead vocalist, and one or two guitars, do move around a bit... That level of "localization" could be handled quite adequately with a pair of stereo speakers or plain old surround. I would even go so far as to suggest that Dolby Atmos is a MASTERING format... (Or "a creation and delivery format"...) But it is NOT particularly a RECORDING format... I would expect that, in most cases, an "Atmos recording" will be made the same way as any other recording... With each instrument or performer recorded in their own track... (At most you might record a few extra tracks specifically because you expect to want them later.... to "build your background".) It is the MIXING process where those tracks will be made into either "a stereo recording", or "a surround sound recording", or "an Atmos recording". I think you also need to consider the fine distinction between "pull", "push", and "demand". For example many of the people I speak to every day have a surround sound system and have no plans to upgrade to an Atmos system... Yet, when we introduce a new product, there is very little market these days for "a plain old 5.1 or 7.1 channel system". EVERYBODY wants a system that is capable of doing Atmos... either because they want it today... or "in case they decide to upgrade later". Likewise, given the choice, when buying movies, most of us would choose "the Atmos versions" instead of "the plain 5.1 or 7.1 channel versions". The reason is that there is nothing to lose by doing so... Those "Atmos discs" will play perfectly in any 5.1 or 7.1 channel system... And, if and when we do decide to upgrade to Atmos, we'll already have our movie collection... (Rather than be faced with the prospect of buying newer updated copies of our favorite movies.) I tried searching for an album that was recorded in Atmos. I can't find any. They all seem to be remastered mixes. If you can find a source of a music album that was recorded in Atmos, let me know. Regardless, I haven't been blown away with SACD surround sound disk, or DVD-A surround disk. As far as there not being a push for Atmos. Who asked for it? From my point of view, it is a push. I agree with the reluctance to accept because of cost. For home theater, if you don't have something that can be matched with Atmos speakers in the same product line, it would involve buying all new speakers. If you want matching speakers.... Also Dolby Atmos HTRs are WAY more than 5.2 AVRs. At the end of the day, the movies and music that excel in Atmos are probably pretty slim. It will take years of top tier movies and artist making great Atmos content for it to stick. I'm an older fart, and for me a lot of modern music sucks, so that is another negative. Why would I want to listen to Atmos for music I don't even like? I have a 7.2 AVR, but why bother. It didn't take off. www.imdb.com/list/ls009067484/. I'm glad I only did 5.2. I don't think Apple will ever stop making spacial audio mixes because they've sold too many compatible devices, but outside of audio forums, I don't know a single person that has a full blown HT, let alone a Atmos setup. You have to realize, you are an early adopter if you have a great Atmos setup. I was genuinely interested and hoping Atmos theaters would take off, but I don't know how many are built, or if more will be built. I can't find one anywhere near me. professional.dolby.com/cinema/dolby-atmosI'll admit, I haven't heard a great HT Atmos, I feel that the home version is a pretty watered down version of what Atmos was intended for in the cinema world. I do feel the same about music. Music has been recorded/mixed in stereo forever. Making it Atmos is different and different doesn't = better. If I ever get my feet wet in Atmos, it would be for gaming. I'd be much more willing to get a pair of Atmos headphones and be able to hear more direction in a game than I would be interested in music surrounding me. A quality sourced stereo album on the right stereo already creates a darn good front stage. Classical concerts, rock concerts, all come front a front stage. Granted a lot louder and something a home stereo can't reproduce, but still a front stage. When it comes to movies, a great 5.1 mix can still impress me. I think that is the main issue for the masses. At this point, I don't think it will ever go away, but outside of Apple audio devices, and a few hard core Atmos home rooms, most people and consumers probably doesn't even know what it is. When the cost of inflation is so high right now, even the right product could fail because it's not needed to live or survive. It's a consumer extra. I could see it failing to the masses, but I don't think it will ever go away. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2024 19:27:48 GMT -5
I have no interest in selling anything. I have no time or energy to convince people to be interested in my interests. Audio was my profession. Audio and HT is a hobby. I like to share and talk about it. I do that locally and at various internet forums. The public can choose whatever it wants. There are as many different interesting things to do as there are people. Intended or not, you gave a straw man argument that I know little about Atmos. That isn't true. I'm just not interested in it for music at all. Sadly, we live in a time of mediocre movies too. So even if Atmos was worth the cost to me, I like most of the older movies more than newer ones. The number of Atmos mixed movies I'd want to own would likely be very slim. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 5, 2024 20:44:58 GMT -5
I have no interest in selling anything. I have no time or energy to convince people to be interested in my interests. Audio was my profession. Audio and HT is a hobby. I like to share and talk about it. I do that locally and at various internet forums. The public can choose whatever it wants. There are as many different interesting things to do as there are people. Intended or not, you gave a straw man argument that I know little about Atmos. That isn't true. I'm just not interested in it for music at all. Sadly, we live in a time of mediocre movies too. So even if Atmos was worth the cost to me, I like most of the older movies more than newer ones. The number of Atmos mixed movies I'd want to own would likely be very slim. You state you can’t play ATMOS. Your State has no ATMOS theaters. You can’t find ATMOS recordings at links I offer to you. You are glad you only did 5.2. You don’t know anybody with an ATMOS setup. You cry ‘strawman’... Did I miss anything? I have no time or energy to convince you of anything. Life is full of choices. An honest discussion would be nice. Hollyweird is producing a lot of woke nonsense today; as a whole, they don't care. Good movies are still being made despite Hollyweird's acceleration into hell. Good remasters of old movies are being produced with upgraded surround sound, and upgraded picture. I play LPs, CDs, Blu-ray music, and various formats of movies. Surround sound is a step up. Some surround sound is exceptional. Some surround sound is forgettable. Some movies are exceptional. Some are forgettable. I have a few dogs in my collection that sit on the shelf. I also have several music recordings and movies that I play many times. My tastes change. Sometimes the old becomes new again. Sometimes, something I liked becomes a dog on the shelf. Every live performance I've heard or seen has elements of surround. Acoustic recorded surround, done well, is more like real life. Electronic surround effects can be done, and are sometimes done, in two channel stereo. Electronic surround effects in multi-channel are a whole new level. I have a few LPs with remarkable surround effects on them... Tomita - Planets. Far East Family Band. Roger Waters - Amused to Death. |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jan 5, 2024 23:52:05 GMT -5
“ Sadly, we live in a time of mediocre movies too. So even if Atmos was worth the cost to me, I like most of the older movies more than newer ones. The number of Atmos mixed movies I'd want to own would likely be very slim.” I certainly agree with you that a ton of mediocre film are out there these days. The industry has geared itself in such a way as to have to churn them out “on schedule” as such, no matter how bad. That being said, I think the number of truly GREAT films that come down the pike each year remains (I think) pretty consistent. My collection is putting the squeeze on storage. A great film needs a great storyline and superb actors….If those are not in place, No level of Atmos processing will save it from Doom. So the greatest thing about collecting both great time honored film and music is you pick and let the mediocre stuff fall by the wayside. Already there’s more out there to play with than the time I’ve got for sure. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2024 11:43:41 GMT -5
Intended or not, you gave a straw man argument that I know little about Atmos. That isn't true. I'm just not interested in it for music at all. Sadly, we live in a time of mediocre movies too. So even if Atmos was worth the cost to me, I like most of the older movies more than newer ones. The number of Atmos mixed movies I'd want to own would likely be very slim. You state you can’t play ATMOS. Your State has no ATMOS theaters. You can’t find ATMOS recordings at links I offer to you. You are glad you only did 5.2. You don’t know anybody with an ATMOS setup. You cry ‘strawman’... Did I miss anything? I have no time or energy to convince you of anything. Life is full of choices. An honest discussion would be nice. Hollyweird is producing a lot of woke nonsense today; as a whole, they don't care. Good movies are still being made despite Hollyweird's acceleration into hell. Good remasters of old movies are being produced with upgraded surround sound, and upgraded picture. I play LPs, CDs, Blu-ray music, and various formats of movies. Surround sound is a step up. Some surround sound is exceptional. Some surround sound is forgettable. Some movies are exceptional. Some are forgettable. I have a few dogs in my collection that sit on the shelf. I also have several music recordings and movies that I play many times. My tastes change. Sometimes the old becomes new again. Sometimes, something I liked becomes a dog on the shelf. Every live performance I've heard or seen has elements of surround. Acoustic recorded surround, done well, is more like real life. Electronic surround effects can be done, and are sometimes done, in two channel stereo. Electronic surround effects in multi-channel are a whole new level. I have a few LPs with remarkable surround effects on them... Tomita - Planets. Far East Family Band. Roger Waters - Amused to Death. You specifically said I know little about Atmos. You are pivoting now that I don't have experince and still using straw man arguments when you know nothing about me, or my knowledge. I fully understand the technology. I was much more interested in the cinema aspect that could support up to 64 speakers and up to 128 input channels, not the home .4 Atmos speakers. I also do have a Atmos soundbar, but you didn't read any of my other post. One car argue that that doesn't count, but I can easily tell the difference between a stereo soundbar, 3.1 and 5.1 soundbar. I've tried Atmos movies and music, and I don't care. I also didn't care for other surround sound music sources. SACD and DVD-A, nor did I care about presence speakers. I'm also not interested in 3rd party audio engineers taking stereo mixes and turning them into Atmos. I would only be interested in movies or perhaps gaming. I could easily get a spacial Apple device, but none of them support ALAC, and that is a deal breaker for me. I've also read post where people who did do a full Atmos HT were not really happy with the results. Maybe not everyone can notice it, or like the effect as much? You are the one who introduced Atmos in a vinyl thread, and I don't know why you did that in the first place, but can you just stop and take it to a Atmos thread on the forum? It really doesn't belong on a vinyl thread. For music, I prefer my reference stereo setup and likely always will. |
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 6, 2024 12:13:18 GMT -5
You state you can’t play ATMOS. Your State has no ATMOS theaters. You can’t find ATMOS recordings at links I offer to you. You are glad you only did 5.2. You don’t know anybody with an ATMOS setup. You cry ‘strawman’... Did I miss anything? I have no time or energy to convince you of anything. Life is full of choices. An honest discussion would be nice. Hollyweird is producing a lot of woke nonsense today; as a whole, they don't care. Good movies are still being made despite Hollyweird's acceleration into hell. Good remasters of old movies are being produced with upgraded surround sound, and upgraded picture. I play LPs, CDs, Blu-ray music, and various formats of movies. Surround sound is a step up. Some surround sound is exceptional. Some surround sound is forgettable. Some movies are exceptional. Some are forgettable. I have a few dogs in my collection that sit on the shelf. I also have several music recordings and movies that I play many times. My tastes change. Sometimes the old becomes new again. Sometimes, something I liked becomes a dog on the shelf. Every live performance I've heard or seen has elements of surround. Acoustic recorded surround, done well, is more like real life. Electronic surround effects can be done, and are sometimes done, in two channel stereo. Electronic surround effects in multi-channel are a whole new level. I have a few LPs with remarkable surround effects on them... Tomita - Planets. Far East Family Band. Roger Waters - Amused to Death. You specifically said I know little about Atmos. You are pivoting now that I don't have experince and still using straw man arguments when you know nothing about me, or my knowledge. I fully understand the technology. I was much more interested in the cinema aspect that could support up to 64 speakers and up to 128 input channels, not the home .4 Atmos speakers. I also do have a Atmos soundbar, but you didn't read any of my other post. One car argue that that doesn't count, but I can easily tell the difference between a stereo soundbar, 3.1 and 5.1 soundbar. I've tried Atmos movies and music, and I don't care. I also didn't care for other surround sound music sources. SACD and DVD-A, nor did I care about presence speakers. I'm also not interested in 3rd party audio engineers taking stereo mixes and turning them into Atmos. I would only be interested in movies or perhaps gaming. I could easily get a spacial Apple device, but none of them support ALAC, and that is a deal breaker for me. I've also read post where people who did do a full Atmos HT were not really happy with the results. Maybe not everyone can notice it, or like the effect as much? You are the one who introduced Atmos in a vinyl thread, and I don't know why you did that in the first place, but can you just stop and take it to a Atmos thread on the forum? It really doesn't belong on a vinyl thread. For music, I prefer my reference stereo setup and likely always will. This was my first post with the words ATMOS: emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1120385/threadIt was a response to YOU talking about ATMOS. You had already written two posts talking about ATMOS. You were the third person here talking about ATMOS. I was the fourth. Then you went on to write 6 more posts concerning ATMOS, even asking me where you could find sources for Atmos music in this post: emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1120398/threadThis was after I gave you ATMOS source links in my first noted post link above. You are a funny guy. Perhaps you should take the Fifth…  It’s obvious you know little about the subject. It's OK. Why the bluster? I think I will play a few LPs today in your honor... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2024 13:52:13 GMT -5
You specifically said I know little about Atmos. You are pivoting now that I don't have experince and still using straw man arguments when you know nothing about me, or my knowledge. I fully understand the technology. I was much more interested in the cinema aspect that could support up to 64 speakers and up to 128 input channels, not the home .4 Atmos speakers. I also do have a Atmos soundbar, but you didn't read any of my other post. One car argue that that doesn't count, but I can easily tell the difference between a stereo soundbar, 3.1 and 5.1 soundbar. I've tried Atmos movies and music, and I don't care. I also didn't care for other surround sound music sources. SACD and DVD-A, nor did I care about presence speakers. I'm also not interested in 3rd party audio engineers taking stereo mixes and turning them into Atmos. I would only be interested in movies or perhaps gaming. I could easily get a spacial Apple device, but none of them support ALAC, and that is a deal breaker for me. I've also read post where people who did do a full Atmos HT were not really happy with the results. Maybe not everyone can notice it, or like the effect as much? You are the one who introduced Atmos in a vinyl thread, and I don't know why you did that in the first place, but can you just stop and take it to a Atmos thread on the forum? It really doesn't belong on a vinyl thread. For music, I prefer my reference stereo setup and likely always will. This was my first post with the words ATMOS: emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1120385/threadIt was a response to YOU talking about ATMOS. You had already written two posts talking about ATMOS. You were the third person here talking about ATMOS. I was the fourth. Then you went on to write 6 more posts concerning ATMOS, even asking me where you could find sources for Atmos music in this post: emotivalounge.proboards.com/post/1120398/threadThis was after I gave you ATMOS source links in my first noted post link above. You are a funny guy. Perhaps you should take the Fifth… It’s obvious you know little about the subject. It's OK. Why the bluster? I think I will play a few LPs today in your honor... I had asked this question, that I don't feel it has been answered. "Now, if the artist and audio engineer planned and recorded an Atmos album, then that would be different, but has anyone actually done that?" I wasn't seeking sources for spacial audio. Apple has tons of that. I tried searching, but I wasn't able to find an answer. As far as I can tell, they seem to come from stereo mixes. It would be completely possible to add more mics and record the sound of a room, and not just remix stereo sources. I would be more interested in that, but even if they did that, how much if that music would I really want to have, and upgrade for such a small sample? I'm not trying to be funny. I really don't like the ideal of taking stereo mixes and transforming them into spacial audio. I did look at the links. Maybe I missed something? Either way, I currently only do hard copy media and Apple Music and that is the only thing I could stream to a starter Atmos device (networked Airplay device). I only got it because I wanted a soundbar for a 2nd TV, and I wanted to dip my toes into Atmos. I was curious and looking forward to it, and I could easily upgrade my HT to at least 5.2.2, but from what I've read from other early adopters, the extra expense isn't worth it. It's also possible that not everyone can hear or perceive the extra spacial channels that well. I just don't get the harsh push, if you don't like it, you don't know you're talking about attitude. If Atmos spacial audio grows, evolves and still exists in many years, with music I really want to listen to, I'll revisit a possible upgrade. ATM, my HT can't touch the low distortion and fidelity of my reference stereo system, and that is another issue. The cost of an audiophile grade system would be huge. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2024 14:13:30 GMT -5
For those who have an older vinyl collection that they still have, but haven't had great success. I'd recommend trying an upgraded phono amp. Make sure the turn table is fully level, double check the tracking weight, anti-skip. Make sure the cartridge is aligned properly. How many hours/years are on that cartridge? How good is the cartridge? If you still don't like it, you might have some valuable albums that you could sell for someone else to enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jan 6, 2024 15:51:51 GMT -5
I have one project left for my vinyl collection. The whole thing is divided into two rather heavy boxes. A few years back I bought a beautiful, collapsing, handtruck for moving big speakers around. That handtruck is going to help me haul that pile of vinyl out to the curbside for Monday morning pick up (or whatever day I’m motivated enough to get it out there onto the street……) I can’t wait lol
Actually, this won’t be the first “spinning” demolition project…… The last one was relegating my record player to trash. I was home when the G-man hit the compacting button, and I heard it CRUSH the turntable. It was very impressive!
|
|
|
|
Post by PaulBe on Jan 6, 2024 16:07:59 GMT -5
I have one project left for my vinyl collection. The whole thing is divided into two rather heavy boxes. A few years back I bought a beautiful, collapsing, handtruck for moving big speakers around. That handtruck is going to help me haul that pile of vinyl out to the curbside for Monday morning pick up (or whatever day I’m motivated enough to get it out there onto the street……) I can’t wait lol Actually, this won’t be the first “spinning” demolition project…… The last one was relegating my record player to trash. I was home when the G-man hit the compacting button, and I heard it CRUSH the turntable. It was very impressive! You are having waaay too much fun here. It's sad when the LPs are so worthless it's easier to dump them than sell them. Sigh... Suggestion - Put them on the curb with a FREE tag. I do that with stuff all the time. It all magically disappears within minutes to a couple of days. |
|
|
|
Post by 405x5 on Jan 6, 2024 16:15:23 GMT -5
I have one project left for my vinyl collection. The whole thing is divided into two rather heavy boxes. A few years back I bought a beautiful, collapsing, handtruck for moving big speakers around. That handtruck is going to help me haul that pile of vinyl out to the curbside for Monday morning pick up (or whatever day I’m motivated enough to get it out there onto the street……) I can’t wait lol Actually, this won’t be the first “spinning” demolition project…… The last one was relegating my record player to trash. I was home when the G-man hit the compacting button, and I heard it CRUSH the turntable. It was very impressive! You are having waaay too much fun here. It's sad when the LPs are so worthless it's easier to dump them than sell them. Sigh... Suggestion - Put them on the curb with a FREE tag. I do that with stuff all the time. It all magically disappears within minutes to a couple of days. Well, you’re right actually, I should give that a shot…… Last time I did that was when I was helping a buddy of mine move.
The poor guy was simply out of time. The new homeowners were coming for a final inspection, and he had stuff in the house. It just had to go and I mean now I just looked at them and said you’re done just put the rest of the stuff out on the street with a sign on it. It says free and it will go and so it went |
|
