What do u think about "object based audio" (atmos, dts:x)?

[Damian83]

Hi, i just want to share my opinion about atmos and also want to hear other's opinions. I have upgraded from 5.1 to 5.1.2 from maybe one year, and i ve used it with atmos tracks rarely as i watch movies in my languages and few discs have this audio track. However ive also downloaded some dts:x demo mkvs, and today i watched matrix revolutions with atmos in my language. What to say? I dont felt much difference from a "standard" (yet great of course) dts-hdma track. Sound from above? No! Ok maybe i have to add some db to the ceiling speakers, however if the atmos speakers are really DISCRETE (as declared everywhere) i should hear them even at lower volume. I mean, in many horror movies there are voices coming from behind that uses ONE surround speaker and you have no doubts the sound is coming from that exact speaker. It doesnt happens with atmos. I dont believe that in a "special-effects-packed" movie like matrix, there are no sounds coming only from above. Even in the DTS.x demos, where there is a sphere flying around the room, there isnt one moment where ONLY ceiling speakers are active. They are active, yes, but never alone. So are they really DISCRETE? From my experience, atmos/dts:x its more dolby prologic/dolby surround, masked by a fancy "object-based-sound" advertising. Resuming which equation is correct for you?

5.1 : atmos/dts:x = 2.0 : 5.1 discrete

or

5.1 : atmos/dts:x = 2.0 : 5.1 prologic/surround

?

for me its the second one. And i hope atmos/dts:x it's only a temporary "starter dish" like prologic was in the past

 

[KBD]

I prefer DTS:X & the few UHD blu-ray I have with that will remain in my possession, because their streaming versions are always in ATMOS.

The few times I've noticed ATMOS was really good was with vocal performance, singing!

It makes me angry that DTS is being excluded from being decoded on a lot of modern TVs. Given the choice, I would choose DTS every time, but the way things are I can only get DTS from my blu-ray player.

 

[Damian83]

I prefer DTS:X & the few UHD blu-ray I have with that will remain in my possession, because their streaming versions are always in ATMOS.

The few times I've noticed ATMOS was really good was with vocal performance, singing!

It makes me angry that DTS is being excluded from being decoded on a lot of modern TVs. Given the choice, I would choose DTS every time, but they way things are I can only get DTS from my blu-ray player.

ehm i not asking if dts:x its better than atmos (of course dts its always better than dolby)...

 

[KBD]

I ignored the question, because it seemed nonsensical. Have a good weekend!

 

[Damian83]

I ignored the question, because it seemed nonsensical. Have a good weekend!

so u answer in an even more nonsensical way?

 

[Zarf2007]

Hi, i just want to share my opinion about atmos and also want to hear other's opinions. I have upgraded from 5.1 to 5.1.2 from maybe one year, and i ve used it with atmos tracks rarely as i watch movies in my languages and few discs have this audio track. However ive also downloaded some dts:x demo mkvs, and today i watched matrix revolutions with atmos in my language. What to say? I dont felt much difference from a "standard" (yet great of course) dts-hdma track. Sound from above? No! Ok maybe i have to add some db to the ceiling speakers, however if the atmos speakers are really DISCRETE (as declared everywhere) i should hear them even at lower volume. I mean, in many horror movies there are voices coming from behind that uses ONE surround speaker and you have no doubts the sound is coming from that exact speaker. It doesnt happens with atmos. I dont believe that in a "special-effects-packed" movie like matrix, there are no sounds coming only from above. Even in the DTS.x demos, where there is a sphere flying around the room, there isnt one moment where ONLY ceiling speakers are active. They are active, yes, but never alone. So are they really DISCRETE? From my experience, atmos/dts:x its more dolby prologic/dolby surround, masked by a fancy "object-based-sound" advertising. Resuming which equation is correct for you?

5.1 : atmos/dts:x = 2.0 : 5.1 discrete

or

5.1 : atmos/dts:x = 2.0 : 5.1 prologic/surround

?

for me its the second one. And i hope atmos/dts:x it's only a temporary "starter dish" like prologic was in the past

It depends on your setup. To get the best from upfiring speakers in atmos you need a 5.1.4 (upfiring atmos speakers at front & surround) config at least and tbh it is better if you have ceiling speakers. Your AVR/processor and amplification is another factor, also room correction is very important, if your AVR has Dirac/Arc/RP it is always gonna be better than audessey.

also room size/carpet/hard floors etc are another factor. There are many things to consider.

 

[dante01]

It depends on your setup. To get the best from upfiring speakers in atmos you need a 5.1.4 (upfiring atmos speakers at front & surround) config at least and tbh it is better if you have ceiling speakers.

THX have done some ,investigation into which setups portray the best Atmos sound. They concluded that it is better to still have 2 back surrounds and just 2 Atmos ceiling speakers if limited to just 9 channels as opposed to sacrificing the back surrounds in order that you can have 4 Atmos speakers. In the eyes and ears of THX, a 7.1.2 setup would be better than a 5.1.4 setup.

It would obviously be even better if you could keep the back surrounds and have at least 4 ceiling speakers as well, but that needs more than 9 channels of amplification and processing.

If you are in a room that cannot accomodate back surrounds anyway then you'd probably not need or benefit from having more than just 2 Atmos ceiling speakers.

 

[Damian83]

Positioning/number of the atmos speakers have nothing to do with what i'm saying. in a standard 5.1 DD digital track i can have one speaker active at a time. While, from what i heared until now, its not possible with atmos/dtsx. In the dts:x demo, with the sphere flying around the room, the sphere activates only surround speakers when it passes near them. When it passes near the ceiling speakers, both ceiling and surround speakers are active, and a similar behaviour is, what i call, prologic, not discrete. Also correct calibration its irrilevant in this case. Movie's dialogues still comes only from center speaker, no matter if u place it under seat or in the terrace and/or if you dont calibrate correctly the amp. Just correct speakers wiring counts.

 

[dante01]

Positioning/number of the atmos speakers have nothing to do with what i'm saying. in a standard 5.1 DD digital track i can have one speaker active at a time. While, from what i heared until now, its not possible with atmos/dtsx. In the dts:x demo, with the sphere flying around the room, the sphere activates only surround speakers when it passes near them. When it passes near the ceiling speakers, both ceiling and surround speakers are active, and a similar behaviour is, what i call, prologic, not discrete. Also correct calibration its irrilevant in this case. Movie's dialogues still comes only from center speaker, no matter if u place it under seat or in the terrace and/or if you dont calibrate correctly the amp. Just correct speakers wiring counts.

Whatever was possible with channel based formats is still possible with onject based formats.

THe depitction of DTS:X and Atmos is determined by how the soundtrack was mixed. Processing such as Pro Logic iiz or Audyssey DTS:X created pseudo height effects that were never envisioned during the production and mixing of the soundtrack. Such processing and the upmixing modes that have now superceded them create pseudo 3D audio. Atmos and DTS:X metada includes actually data that determines where objects would be placed, their size and their movement.


The speaker wiring has no effect upon anything. Yes, it needs to be correct, but this has nothing to do with where you place the speakers. THe speakers need to be located in specific locations and cannot be placed anywhere you please. Here's an Atmos guide that illustrates this:

https://www.dolby.com/siteassets/technologies/dolby-atmos/atmos-installation-guidelines-121318_r3.1.pdf

The same is true of DTS:X and Auro 3D.



Calibration is still also important as speaker location. The speakers still need to be balanced relative to your listening location with the appropriate delays and room EQ correction would still be of some importance in an Atmos or DTS:X setup.

Go stand outside and listen for a plane. Do you only hear a plane overhead when one flies by or are there other sounds immersing you? Besiodes which, the human auditory system has no ability to localise audio that is eminating anywhere 30° above the listeners horizon. You don't automatically know exact;ly where the plane is until you actually see it.

While watching films with channel based soundtracks, do all the other speakers fall silent when anyone is talking?


Anyway, Atmos for the cinema actually includes a 9.1 channel based layer that is depicted in that theatre despite the soundtrack being Atmos in nature.

 

[Damian83]

ok i give up. don't know if my english is bad or if people wont/cant understand what i'm saying...

 

[dante01]

If simply suggesting that there's little to differentiate Atmos or DTS:X from more conventional channel based formats then yes, the differences are not that great. You do gain a more immersive soundfield though even if not night and day.

You cannot attain what you get via an Atmos or DTS:X setup via a more conventional 5.1 or 7.1 setup. It isn't all about overhead effects.

 

[Damian83]

the differences are not that great. You do gain a more immersive soundfield though even if not night and day.

This! So, considering this, is it possible to have an atmos track where only atmos channels are active? lets say a sound that "bounce" from left to right (in a x.x.2 config) or from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 speaker (in a x.x.4 config)??? i intend "track" as audio file, not necessarily a movie audio track

 

[SeanBrothers]

I think the clisest I've heard to what I think you're asking, @Damian83 , is demonstrated in Yello's album Point. There are sounds that only come from overhead speakers, i.e. discrete. Because it's music, however, it is often momentary and never without other sounds coming from other speakers.

Full disclosure: I have a 7.1.4 system with ceiling speakers.

 

[Damian83]

I think the clisest I've heard to what I think you're asking, @Damian83 , is demonstrated in Yello's album Point. There are sounds that only come from overhead speakers, i.e. discrete. Because it's music, however, it is often momentary and never without other sounds coming from other speakers.

Full disclosure: I have a 7.1.4 system with ceiling speakers.

which track? trying to download it. ive also downloaded plenty of atmos demos, even an user created demo. tomorrow ill try them

 

[JustinT350]

Could you not try playing any Atmos disc, but have all your base layer speakers disconnected? Leaving only the Atmos speakers on

 

[Damian83]

Could you not try playing any Atmos disc, but have all your base layer speakers disconnected? Leaving only the Atmos speakers on

and whats the point of doing this? of course they will sound, but during movie also other speakers will sound too. I can make a manual switch on surround speakers to disable them during some movie scenes in order to have a full overhead sound. ahahhahahhaha

 

[SeanBrothers]

which track?

I'm not sure. I just recall thinking that the album as a whole makes a great Atmos demo. A little bit like the early stereo mixes that were exaggerated to show of stereo.

Maybe Waba Duba?

 

[JustinT350]

and whats the point of doing this? of course they will sound, but during movie also other speakers will sound too. I can make a manual switch on surround speakers to disable them during some movie scenes in order to have a full overhead sound. ahahhahahhaha

So you can determine if you are getting movement between your speakers.

Chances are they are just too subtle/being overpowered by your base layer.

 

[Conrad]

This! So, considering this, is it possible to have an atmos track where only atmos channels are active? lets say a sound that "bounce" from left to right (in a x.x.2 config) or from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 speaker (in a x.x.4 config)??? i intend "track" as audio file, not necessarily a movie audio track

Grab a copy of the Dolby helicopter demo, that uses only the atmos channels and has a helicopter flying in a circle. It uses all four of my atmos speakers and it only uses atmos speakers (when present).

 

[Damian83]

Grab a copy of the Dolby helicopter demo, that uses only the atmos channels and has a helicopter flying in a circle. It uses all four of my atmos speakers and it only uses atmos speakers (when present).

got it! thanks! tomorrow ill try it

 

[Cevolution]

I’m trying figure out the OP’s objective to this thread? I’m not sure what they are wanting out of it, because the majority of explanations regarding how object based audio tech works, and other variables which can affect the quality of it, as well as suggestions about turning all of the other speakers off and just running the Atmos speakers, to test these tracks, have been disregarded by the OP?

Is the OP after specific examples from movies that do this well so that they can try them out? In which case, they could’ve made this the focus of the thread, and asked for this in their original post, perhaps in the heading... I won’t be providing the OP with any examples though, because I have a suspicion that they will go straight to a site where they can pirate it, rather than actually buying the disc.

So far, it just sounds to me that the OP is just wanting people to agree with them about their opinion that Atmos/DTS-X doesn’t offer much, and is essentially matrixed and not discrete. Do I agree with you OP that Atmos/DTS-X practically offers nothing over a standard lossless audio 5.1/7.1 track, and that the Atmos speakers are simply mimicking the sounds from other speakers, no, certainly not. I have close to 700 4K Blu-ray’s and more than 3000 1080p Blu-ray’s, so I do have plenty of experience with this listening to these tracks… There are some great Atmos/DTS-X mixes with scenes where the Atmos speakers are extremely active, and sounds come out of each Atmos speaker that are unique to it, including sounds that travel in a direction from one Atmos speaker to another.

Have you listened to many tracks where 2 different mixes are available for some of these movies?

 

[Damian83]

So far, it just sounds to me that the OP is just wanting people to agree with them about their opinion that Atmos/DTS-X doesn’t offer much, and is essentially matrixed and not discrete. Do I agree with you OP that Atmos/DTS-X practically offers nothing over a standard lossless audio 5.1/7.1 track, and that the Atmos speakers are simply mimicking the sounds from other speakers, no, certainly not. I have close to 700 4K Blu-ray’s and more than 3000 1080p Blu-ray’s, so I do have plenty of experience with this listening to these tracks… There are some great Atmos/DTS-X mixes with scenes where the Atmos speakers are extremely active, and sounds come out of each Atmos speaker that are unique to it, including sounds that travel in a direction from one Atmos speaker to another.

Before writing this thread i only tried 2 dts:x demos and one movie (matrix resurrections). Neither of them gave me that WOW effect i had more than 20 years ago when i had my first multichannel system, a pc with a 17" screen + 4.1 creative satellite speakers, and i watched matrix dvd with a DD track. So i'm simply asking if it's me that can't hear that difference or if atmos is far away from giving that WOW effect you have when upgrade from 2.0 to 5.1 (even 4.0 its enough in fact). And i had the answers i was looking for. You also confirmed it saying that "just atmos" isnt enough to feel the difference on every movie (while 2.0>5.1 upgrade is noticeable almost everywhere). It's more like HDR or 3D: the fact a movie has hdr or 3d (or atmos) it doesnt mean automatically that it uses that technology properly.... so, what to say, tomorrow ill try these demos so i can finally convince myself that atmos is discrete and not a simple gimmick, then ill pray next movie ill watch will use it properly and not just to blink that cool "THD/Atmos" writing on my amp's display

 

[Cevolution]

Before writing this thread i only tried 2 dts:x demos and one movie (matrix resurrections). Neither of them gave me that WOW effect i had more than 20 years ago when i had my first multichannel system, a pc with a 17" screen + 4.1 creative satellite speakers, and i watched matrix dvd with a DD track. So i'm simply asking if it's me that can't hear that difference or if atmos is far away from giving that WOW effect you have when upgrade from 2.0 to 5.1 (even 4.0 its enough in fact). And i had the answers i was looking for. You also confirmed it saying that "just atmos" isnt enough to feel the difference on every movie (while 2.0>5.1 upgrade is noticeable almost everywhere). It's more like HDR or 3D: the fact a movie has hdr or 3d (or atmos) it doesnt mean automatically that it uses that technology properly.... so, what to say, tomorrow ill try these demos so i can finally convince myself that atmos is discrete and not a simple gimmick, then ill pray next movie ill watch will use it properly and not just to blink that cool "THD/Atmos" writing on my amp's display

You have confirmed pretty much what I thought since reading your very first post, which is that you are essentially wasting everybodies time, and that this is really nothing more than a troll thread… Because it honestly does appears that all you’re really interested in doing here is, telling others based on your extremely limited experience with object based audio, that you believe it’s basically a gimmick, and are more looking for others that share this opinion to reassure you about your views which you feel you have already established regarding Atmos and DTS:X.

And thank you for mentioning 3D and HDR comparing those to this in your post too, reinforcing the impression I already had of you based on what you have said (I was intending to bring that up, making a joke about it at your expense about how you likely think those are gimmicks as well)… I would’ve easily guessed that you were likely one of those type of people long before you said it, who likely often believes that almost every newish tech in the world of home theatre are gimmicks, and over the years you’ve probably started similar threads on sites like this to say the same about 3D and HDR etc too.

I didn’t confirm anything at all… It seems like you have already made up your mind, and you are simply trying to find things in comments that supports this and your agenda. Nowhere did I say that the technology is used to it’s full potential in every case, however I didn’t state that it is rarely used to it’s full potential either… It’s been pointed out to you by others that the quality of this can greatly depend on the mix (plus other variables), and this same issue is not exclusive to Atmos/DTS:X tracks. There are plenty of 5.1/7.1 lossless tracks that you could say the same about, which have been mixed poorly, and don’t utilise all of the speakers in these configurations well… If you disagree, then just like in this situation with Atmos/DTS:X, you clearly don’t have as much experience comparing these things as you think you do.

Based on some of the things that you have said in this thread, your setup doesn’t sound like it’s adequate to me, and it seems like you don’t really want to spend money on the content… Your viewing of The Matrix Resurrections, and your free demos which didn’t “wow” you, are a long way from being enough to cut it for you to be able to make a creditable determination, and for you to be boisterous about these experiences, using them to inform others about any true shortcomings…

 

[Dolus]

This! So, considering this, is it possible to have an atmos track where only atmos channels are active? lets say a sound that "bounce" from left to right (in a x.x.2 config) or from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 speaker (in a x.x.4 config)??? i intend "track" as audio file, not necessarily a movie audio track

Maybe, 'A Quiet Place II' has an interesting first scene.

Spoiler: For those who prefer not to know.

Scene 1 opens in small town America on a lazy summer afternoon. Main street is quiet and most people are at a junior baseball game. Suddenly something happens overhead and everyone goes quiet and stares at the sky. All you hear is mainly sound from above that rolls around the room above you. The interesting thing is that there is a lot o bass content but the cues in the overhead speakers make it sound like the bass is coming from above.
A Quiet Place Part II (2020) - IMDb

 

[GeorgeL78]

Maybe, 'A Quiet Place II' has an interesting first scene.

Spoiler: For those who prefer not to know.

Scene 1 opens in small town America on a lazy summer afternoon. Main street is quiet and most people are at a junior baseball game. Suddenly something happens overhead and everyone goes quiet and stares at the sky. All you hear is mainly sound from above that rolls around the room above you. The interesting thing is that there is a lot o bass content but the cues in the overhead speakers make it sound like the bass is coming from above.
A Quiet Place Part II (2020) - IMDb

I'd also add the opening scene of Gravity (iTunes or the particular Blu Ray version that has the Atmos soundtrack) with the voices moving around all speakers...really well done.