Started Doing Some Atmos Mixes...Thumbs Up AND Down [2nd Update]

[Anderton]

Studio One's latest update has Atmos and the Dolby Renderer, so I've been taking stereo mixes and seeing what Atmos can do. My experiments are all binaural rendering into headphones, I haven't committed to the full-blown multi-speaker thang yet.

 

Thumbs up: It is an advancement and gives music more space. Little things, like being able to bring a lead singer closer to you or further away with messing with levels, is very cool. So is placing a "virtual band" onstage with a more realistic sense of space than what you can get with panpots. I wouldn't quite say it is to stereo as stereo was to mono, but it's a valid analogy.

 

Thumbs down: I post my music on YouTube these days. So what do I do? Post the binaural version and say "you have to listen on headphones?" Post stereo and binaural versions, and see what gets the most clicks? Wait until YouTube can deliver 5.1 surround files for the small number of people who will be able to play them? It took about a decade for records to transition from mono to stereo, I think we're looking at something equivalent for surround mixes (which may be optimistic).

 

Workflow: I've found it's a lot easier to nail a stereo mix, then import it into an Atmos project and do a surround mix based on the stereo. Starting with Atmos is more daunting, due to the possibilities. If you think it takes a while to decide where to pan something, multiply that by 10 for Atmos. 

 

Also, I haven't tried any LCR mixes yet...not sure what to expect there. Should be interesting

 

 

 

 

[Paul Vnuk Jr.]

As a newb on the process. Are you able to mix in binaural with any headphones, or like with Logic, do you need AirPods Max for example?

[Anderton]

Hi Paul! You can mix with any headphones, providing they receive a binaural render. Headphones with good imaging and a wide soundstage are optimum for binaural listening, but traditional headphones will take you where you need to go.

 

You might enjoy this blog post I did for PreSonus, now that Studio One does Atmos rendering. It's a quick read, and part of it is about why headphones work. It also gets into Beds, Objects, and Metadata with a James Bond movie analogy

[David Emm]

I'm loosely intrigued, but without the "full-blown multi-speaker thang," the immersive nature of it is bound to be limited, if not made semi-impossible. I heard "Switched-On Bach" well-mixed in quad, which was stunning, but expense and lack of a proper standard killed that sort of thing off. Headphones have become starship-quality, if you want to drop the bucks, but how would that translate for ATMOS listeners? I'll hazard a guess and say its not an ear bud thing.🤨

 

In addition, that's an installation for a movie theater, not a standard private home. With COVID, streaming & greed (attorneys at law) having unseated movie theaters, the unholy expense of such a rig isn't likely to be paid through concession sales. The ROI problem has already crushed a lot of franchisees who are suddenly faced with the cost of new laser projection systems, which is, eh, Himalayan. It reminds me of an old song by Tin Huey: "I Could Rule the World If I Could Only Get the Parts."

 

I'm impressed by ATMOS; its next-level and a half. The range of options is orchestral. I simply doubt that it can be scaled down for mass consumption. That means it'll most likely appear in a few fixed installations like the Sphere in Vegas, but not in your den. I can relate to the initial excitement, because I got to see "2001: A Space Odyssey" in Cinerama. It featured a massive screen fed by three synchronized projectors. The sound system was surreal. That first bass note of "Thus Spake Zarathustra" rattled my bones. It stunned the bleep out of me. Now? I'd be afraid to attend the show for fear of having it hit the brown note. 😬

[KenElevenShadows]

On 10/2/2023 at 10:03 AM, Anderton said:

 

 

Thumbs down: I post my music on YouTube these days. So what do I do? Post the binaural version and say "you have to listen on headphones?" Post stereo and binaural versions, and see what gets the most clicks?

 

 

Why not? A lot of people watch YouTube with their phone and earbuds anyway. It's a great way to introduce someone to binaural, and I would think sound nerds everywhere would be interested.

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, David Emm said:

I'm loosely intrigued, but without the "full-blown multi-speaker thang," the immersive nature of it is bound to be limited, if not made semi-impossible.

 

It's not the same as a multi-speaker setup, but the physics behind binaural encoding and headphones is real and effective. It's explained in the blog post mentioned above. If you've ever tried the Waves Nx plugins that emulate studio control rooms, it really does feel like you're in a room - not having sound injected into your left and right ears. 

 

But the elephant in the room is this: mixing so stuff comes from behind you is great for movies, but frankly, IMHO it has about the same relevance to music as ping-pong balls bouncing from left to right had when stereo was introduced. For movies, think of Atmos as surround. For headphones and music, think of it as super-stereo, where the "stereo image" extends in front of you like an arc from left to right, instead of a straight line. Imagine binaural panning that goes forward instead of just side to side, and you'll be close.

 

All of a sudden, you have additional space between the left and right channels. It's much easier to differentiate instruments. I had a stereo mix of a string quartet that I thought sounded pretty good. When I did an Atmos mix of the same part, you could hear every instrument clearly, as if the player was sitting in front of you. You don't need multiple speakers to have that experience with surround/Atmos. 

 

Other than reading the blog post mentioned above, I suggest you put on a decent pair of headphones and check out this 2-minute demo from Dolby. It may not sound like you're in a room with 5 speakers and a sub, but you'll feel like you're in a much bigger space compared to stereo.

[David Emm]

Having read your blog post, I get it. The most striking aspect is height. The gain of its translation into even "just" binaural makes it feel more useful and appealing. I don't expect to hear the real thing in an auditorium, but that will get me closer. In one sense, it doesn't seem like such a great leap to take, since I already mentally place my synths in different orchestral positions when I compose anyway. One early adopter said the wealth of riches was daunting because your number of choices took an exponential leap beyond just the stereo field. I'll have to keep that in mind as I listen. Its going to take time for ALL of our ears to grow into what it can mean.

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, David Emm said:

I don't expect to hear the real thing in an auditorium, but that will get me closer. In one sense, it doesn't seem like such a great leap to take, since I already mentally place my synths in different orchestral positions when I compose anyway. One early adopter said the wealth of riches was daunting because your number of choices took an exponential leap beyond just the stereo field. I'll have to keep that in mind as I listen. Its going to take time for ALL of our ears to grow into what it can me

 

Height is the weakest aspect of translating to binaural, compared to having a speaker mounted on the ceiling (or bouncing sound off the ceiling from a sound bar). But it still makes a difference, and adds another useable element.

 

As mentioned in the first post, the best way I've found around the daunting number of choices is to nail a stereo mix first. Bringing the stereo project into a surround environment only gives you an approximation of the stereo mix, but oddly enough that's an advantage. It will guide you as to what you want to change to improve the mix.

 

The ability to differentiate instruments in a mix is off the hook. Stick some reverb in the back and sides, and you'll feel the "you are there" vibe.

[Bill Heins]

Since I do strictly stereo but would like to get into surround audio at some point what is the simple diffence between atmos and normal surround like 5.1, 7.1, etc.? I have no interest in mixing for headphones but rather surround setups.

 

Bill

[Anderton]

5 minutes ago, Bill Heins said:

what is the simple diffence between atmos and normal surround like 5.1, 7.1, etc.?

 

Atmos adds a height element. An Atmos mix consists of a Bed (basically a big stem that's a surround mix), and Objects that can move around freely inside the Atmos 3D space. Also, surround assigns sounds to speaker streams. Atmos uses Metadata that tells the sound where to go within the Atmos space. For example, suppose you mix over a 7.2 speaker system. Atmos defines where those sounds are supposed to go. If played back over a 5.1 system, downmixing can be done intelligently based on the Metadata to have the 7.2 data translate well to 5.1.

 

 

[Bill Heins]

Thanks Craig, I figured there was a close tie but just wasn't sure how it worked

 

Bill

[Anderton]

Okay...did my first start-to-finish mix in Atmos, not just a remix, rendering to binaural. Here's my current take on immersive:

 

Speaker-based setup DOA for most consumers: Very few people are in a position to have a full-blown surround system with speakers. If you look at the Dolby site, the configurations all assume you have a big room with nothing in it, place your speakers at the perfect angles, and have enough $$ to buy the necessary speakers and playback devices. Ain't gonna happen, except for those who prioritize having a home theater setup. Sure, a few people with bucks to burn who own big homes can go for it, but immersive audio will just further the gap between the haves and have nots into the world of entertainment. Multichannel on the home theater level will fail to get consumer traction, just as it did the other four times the industry want to sell the idea, starting with Quad back in the 70s.

 

Headphones with binaural renders: Is it lame compared to a speaker-based setup? Absolutely. Is it better than stereo? Yes. But I don't think the difference will be enough to make consumers gasp in awe. People like us will appreciate the extra detail and mixing options, but at the end of the day, binaual affects only the sound, not the music. Consumers listen to music, engineers listen to sound. There are a lot more consumers than engineers. I suppose consumers will be dragged into headphone-world immersive thanks to efforts from Apple and such, but it's not a full immersive experience. 

 

So...how should I mix my tunes? For my next song, I'm going to post a stereo mix and a binaural headphones-only mix on my YoutTube channel, and see what the reactions are. It would be a PITA to do both going forward.

 

I think this is the bottom line: If someone doesn't like my music in stereo, they're not going to like it in binaural. And if they like my music in binaural, they won't like it any less in stereo. 

 

 

 

 

[KuruPrionz]

^^^ Great post, Craig!

 

You are correct regarding complete, properly tuned surround systems being "out of reach" for most of us. This is at least to some extent due to the required position for accurate listening being a relatively small area in a large room. An indulgence to be sure. 

 

I have lots of friends and acquaintances at many levels of prosperity and I don't know of a single one who has a surround system at home. 

I remember Quad, it got almost zero traction. Things haven't changed much. None of the clubs up here are using a surround system, most of them are probably mono or at least mixed that way for live music and recorded playback - this provides a consistent sound to everybody in a room. Otherwise, if the sound man pans an instrument to the right, the people on the far left side of the room may not even hear it. Clubs depend on filling a room with listeners (consumers!), they can't afford to have one table in the best spot that is the only place the music sounds right. 

 

I don't see a viable solution at this point. 

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

I don't see a viable solution at this point. 

 

Atmos is still great for movie theaters, because the room is big enough that the "sweet spot" is pretty big.

 

Some companies are eyeing the megachurch market as being ripe for surround. The reality is there are maybe 1,750 megachurces in the US, but the movement is fading fast so it's not a growth market. And if a megachurch goes full immersive, who's going to do the mixing? Mixing surround is exponentially more difficult that even stereo, let alone mono.

 

Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of being immersed in sound by a gorgeous, high-powered Atmos system in a beautiful, spacious home theater room with tasteful acoustic treatment and no parallel walls. I also like the idea of having a modest yacht and cruising around the Greek islands, with a glass of Louis Latour Meursault-Blagny Chateau de Blagny Premier Cru 2019 in my hand. There are lots of ideas I like  

[KuruPrionz]

Why a "modest" yacht?

Might as well go gigantic and then you could put a complete Atmos room in it too. 

 

You'll want a cook that catches and cooks swordfish while you're at it. 😇

[Dave Bryce]

11 hours ago, Anderton said:

Okay...did my first start-to-finish mix in Atmos, not just a remix, rendering to binaural. Here's my current take on immersive:

 

Speaker-based setup DOA for most consumers: Very few people are in a position to have a full-blown surround system with speakers. If you look at the Dolby site, the configurations all assume you have a big room with nothing in it, place your speakers at the perfect angles, and have enough $$ to buy the necessary speakers and playback devices. Ain't gonna happen, except for those who prioritize having a home theater setup. Sure, a few people with bucks to burn who own big homes can go for it, but immersive audio will just further the gap between the haves and have nots into the world of entertainment. Multichannel on the home theater level will fail to get consumer traction, just as it did the other four times the industry want to sell the idea, starting with Quad back in the 70s.

 

Headphones with binaural renders: Is it lame compared to a speaker-based setup? Absolutely. Is it better than stereo? Yes. But I don't think the difference will be enough to make consumers gasp in awe. People like us will appreciate the extra detail and mixing options, but at the end of the day, binaual affects only the sound, not the music. Consumers listen to music, engineers listen to sound. There are a lot more consumers than engineers. I suppose consumers will be dragged into headphone-world immersive thanks to efforts from Apple and such, but it's not a full immersive experience. 

 

So...how should I mix my tunes? For my next song, I'm going to post a stereo mix and a binaural headphones-only mix on my YouTube channel, and see what the reactions are. It would be a PITA to do both going forward.

 

I think this is the bottom line: If someone doesn't like my music in stereo, they're not going to like it in binaural. And if they like my music in binaural, they won't like it any less in stereo. 

              

 

dB

 

[Anderton]

Okay...I did a complete Atmos 5.1 mix rendered to binaural, a complete stereo mix, and a downmix from the Atmos to stereo. Surprise #1: The downmix did a credible job of translating what I did with Atmos into two tracks.

 

So, I took my trusty portable music player (some people call them "telephones," although I've never actually seen someone talk on them), and A-Bed the Atmos binaural and downmixed stereo mixes while taking walks. The difference is comparatively subtle, it's not a sledgehammer difference like mono vs. stereo. But, there's no question the stereo sounded "flat" after listening to the Atmos mix. (Remember, I'm talking binaural headphone mix, not real surround.) With Atmos, it sounded like the mix was in front of me and to the sides, as well as a little toward the rear. It sounded fuller. Again, the difference wasn't astonishingly mind-boggling, but I definitely preferred the binaural Atmos mix.

 

Next, I want to check out what the binaural mix sounds like coming out of regular speakers. I suspect it will be messed up because of the phase issues, but if I could do a one-size-fits-all mix, that would make life much easier.

 

Final thought: When mixing in stereo, I always start in mono. I didn't do that this time with the 5.1 mix, but I'm going to give it a try.