Bob you are 100% right about spatial audio. I learned a lot about this during my time with the ill-fated QSound.

Not only do we only have 2 ears but they’re programmed to turn and FACE the source of sounds. It’s a primitive, autonomic survival mechanism – can’t be bypassed or tech-tricked into not working. New sounds from behind us or off to the side make us want to turn to face them.

While we can use that mechanism to create feelings of surprise or to focus attention on certain things in an environment, what we can’t do is make the limbic system stop functioning.

So these technologies that put sounds all over the place – around, behind or beside us – are like a carnival ride: fun and cool, but fundamentally so because they disturb our natural state.

Experiencing music is a visceral and very natural process. We “hear” it with our ears, brains, hearts and bodies. It is most effective when we let it wash over us and we invest our entire selves in the process. But when we are distracted, even unconsciously – when peripheral sounds put us in a state of limbic high alert – we simply cannot connect with it completely.

Add to this that a lot of the spatial trickery has to do with playing with phase which imposes a kind of diaphanous quality on some elements of mixes and what you have is a fundamentally uncomfortable way of experiencing music.

From my point of view these are cool technologies in search of a valid reason to exist beyond the commercial one. The geek in me loves playing with them – but the music lover in me finds them distracting and counter productive.

Bob Ezrin

______________________________________

You’re right about Atmos sounding terrible.
I recently finished an Atmos mix of a popular classic hard rock record from the mid 80s. The original mix wasn’t great in the first place, so a stereo remix was absolutely needed before even attempting Atmos. Having listened to dozens of Atmos records, I concluded that it’s not good for music. They all sound terrible. They sound like rough mixes with bad reverbs.
Sometimes spatial audio is the version Apple plays first, rather than the original, which is unfortunate.
Apple headphones can reproduce it to a point, and 99% of the listeners are going to be hearing these on headphones anyway.
Who do you know that has a 14 speaker Atmos set up at home?
When it was first announced and I was approached by people from Dolby and some of the labels, I was very excited. Then I realized what most of the final results sounded like and was disappointed.
Apple Music unfortunately doesn’t do anywhere near the streaming numbers of Spotify. And Spotify has yet to support the format.
When it comes to straight stereo mixes, Apple sounds far superior.

Jay Ruston

______________________________________

The key point for immersive (binaural) music on headphones, is that it sounds different to LR stereo.  Any consumer can immediately hear it, and it has a wow factor.
Of course it’s not really about music or fidelity, but about presenting an experience.  But unlike Hi-res the punters can hear the difference straight away.  This is certainly Apple’s belief, and why it might take off.

 

Kind Regards

 

Crispin Herrod-Taylor

Managing Director, Crookwood

______________________________________

You sound like me before I actually heard Atmos. Have you heard it – on speakers?

From my perspective in regards to Dolby Atmos/Immersive mixing, I’ve heard many comments both for, and against the format. The two groups of professionals affected by the revolution begun a few years back when Universal began stealthily mixing hundreds of records in Atmos, shape their opinions by and large on how this tech/format switch affects them personally. We can all understand this.

Will this format survive public scrutiny/interest?  Immersive Audio – Dolby Atmos (Apple calls it “Spatial Audio”) and Sony 360R – have yet to register in the consciousness of the general public in a big way, but the same could be said of many technological revolutions that have taken place over the past few decades only 18 months after early adopters discover them. (Apple declared its support of the Dolby Atmos format in June 2021, sparking an industry-wide stampede to mix in this format).

The main players in this shift (consumer electronics manufacturers, pro audio manufacturers, record labels, streaming platforms, etc.) are playing the long game, and because of the software’s unique ability to simultaneously create and stream binaural and speaker versions of a mix, this immersive revolution has a tremendous chance of sticking around.

The obvious reason for this is that consumers do not have to rush out to make an equipment change to listen. We can listen to immersive mixes as we normally would in headphones – ALL manner of headphones now – and this is significant because industry surveys have stated that 80% of streamed music is consumed over headphones. And car systems are beginning to arrive…over the speakers we listen to most.

The LONG GAME: Next time a person moves house, or revamps their system to the latest technology, those audio and video systems will no doubt be Atmos/Immersive capable systems – that’s the long game, and the industry is well prepared to wait for the format to mature. Consumers can stand by!

All my best,

Brian Malouf

Brian Malouf

Producer | Mixer

Associate Professor of Practice

USC Thornton School of Music

______________________________________

Hi Bob,

I wanted to point out a few things regarding immersive (spatial) audio.

You’re correct in that it’s been tried multiple times, and by any commercial standard has failed. A bit of history – Quad was mainly an experiment, a proof of concept if you will. 5.1 and 7.1 surround (90’s) died due to a number of factors, primarily needing 6 (or 8) loudspeakers with the space to properly place them, and the format war fought out in the industry between DSD and DVD-Audio (later Blu Ray Disc) as the carrier and format of choice. In the Beta vs VHS war, VHS won out despite being an inferior format. In the DSD/DVD-A war, everyone lost out and they all died (BluRay is still around as a niche format). Ambisonics has largely been the domain of academics and universities, but has gained growing acceptance in the game audio industry and has also seen a lot of development lately.

There are a few key factors today that suggest current immersive formats (Dolby Atmos, Sony 360 Reality Audio and possibly Auro-3D being the prime candidates) might have a better chance of succeeding this time around. First is as you note – consumers no longer need a boatload of speakers carefully placed around their listening room (although there are still those individuals with enough space and money to do so, it isn’t required), as research has improved the ability to virtualize a listening room and deliver that experience convincingly over headphones or earbuds. It’s gotten a lot better in only the last few years, and will only improve as time goes on. Many companies are also actively doing research to improve their algorithms and personalize them to each individual listener (both Sony and Dolby offer to take a picture of your pinnae – the outside part of your ears, and head to create a more personalized HRTF, the calculations used to simulate the space as it would sound to you). Second is that we appear to be moving towards a more spatial experience in other areas – gaming and cinema being two prime examples, people are much more accustomed to it and come to expect it more and more. Third is that we have a real battle on our hands in the industry, mainly between Dolby and Sony who are both vying to be the defacto standard across the board, so both are pumping money into marketing, R&D, creating new content and repurposing old (to varying degrees of success as you rightly point out), and with full support of multiple streaming platforms – Apple music, Tidal, Amazon, Deezer. Some of these will play the spatial version by default, unless you tell it not to. The user base is there.

So you’re correct in that people only have 2 ears, but as I’m sure you’ve noticed yourself, despite having only 2 ears, you have no problem hearing sounds all around you, above you, below you, etc. Not just in front of you between where a left and right speaker would be ;-). We can recreate that same perceptual experience in headphones. The better the HRTF measurement, the more accurate the result. Or if you prefer, and you have the space and money, you can buy a bunch of speakers and set up the same experience in your home. It isn’t nearly as mobile or convenient though, and we all know convenience trumps everything else!

As you pointed out, not all of these reissues or new productions benefit from or are improved by being done in immersive. I would argue that the same thing applied back when CDs were new and labels were scrambling to release content, often from the vinyl eq’d masters, rather than going back and doing a proper CD version (ideally with the artist and producer involved). Same thing happened with some of the 5.1 surround material that was released in the 90’s and 2000’s. However, there was also some amazing material released, both remixes and new content, that blew everyone’s mind and really served to spotlight the strengths of the new format (3 of my favorites that were redone in 5.1 are Beck “Sea Changes”, Beatles “Love”, and The Flaming Lips “Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots”). I would say the same of Atmos and 360RA, some of the content can sound gimmicky, or just doesn’t really need or benefit from the additional space, but there are releases that are completely riveting experiences as well (check out Fantastic Negrito’s “Have You Lost Your Mind Yet?”, Alicia Key’s “Alicia” , Stewart Copeland & Ricky Kej “Divine Tides” or Jane Ira Bloom “Picturing the Invisible – Focus 1” all recent or current Grammy nominees/winners).

Yes, it’s still a niche and a tiny market compared to the overall music market. But it appears to be growing, and there does seem to be a market for it (last I checked Mercedes-Benz has 3% of the automobile market, they seem to do just fine).

Finally and more importantly, it affords artists and creators a much larger, expansive pallet on which to create, play, experiment, stretch and explore in order to bring new experiences to fans which would be impossible in stereo. My experience working with artists is that new ideas, new technology and new formats all tend to be welcomed as additional opportunities to get into a creative space and explore what happens. So far, it seem that is exactly what’s happening in immersive audio, with more to come. More music can’t be a bad thing, can it?

Hope you’re staying dry in all this rain!

Best regards,

Thor Legvold
—
Sonovo A/S
Immersive + Surround Mastering & Production
Stavanger, Norway + Los Angeles, California

______________________________________

God you are so wrong about Atmos. Yeah we have ‘’two ears.” Put those two ears surrounded by speakers in front, back, center and above and put on Tom Petty’s ‘’Wildflowers” or The Beatles ‘’White Album” or ‘’Abbey Road’’ or ‘’Aqualung” in Atmos and tell me you are not blown away. That you are not ‘’immersed’’ in the sound like never before. It is an unbelievable experience. Not to mention what movies and shows in Atmos can do. BIG DIFFERENCE.

Yes there are crap atmos mixes for streaming music, mostly perpetrated by Warner Music. But the good ones done by Ryan Ulyate and Giles and Steve Wilson etc are unbelievable.

Please stop pontificating about what you obviously know nothing about nor have experienced correctly. It is an insult to professionals who are changing the way we listen to music. And man is it cool.

Sure you won’t print this because I’m not name dropping some celebrity or record biz exec you slobber over, and I don’t really care and rarely if ever do I respond or post anywhere, but this kinda pissed me off. There is enough misinformation out there as it is. On every level. Don’t contribute to it.

Thanks

Jim Cortez