Atmos vs 5.1

[AYanguas]

I believe the situation is a bit more nuanced. Most Atmos mixes contain sounds in a 7.1 bed plus sounds that are in objects described in metadata. When you playback an Atmos track on a non-atmos capable receiver or processor (which does not process the metadata), the bed based sounds are accurately placed in their expected 7.1/5.1 locations, but the object based sounds are less precisely "folded down" to an approximate 7.1/5.1 position. The fact is, this fold down positioning of object based sounds is inherently less accurate on non-atmos capable systems than metadata processing would be and it may not yield the same result as a dedicated 5.1/7.1 mix would. Since this fold down process is automatic and probably not part of an atmos mixing engineers normal workflow, it probably is a bit hit or miss in terms of resulting accuracy. An Atmos mix that primarily used bed based sounds with little to no panning or 3-d movement and few, if any, object based sounds, should sound pretty good on a non-Atmos system.

However, if you play an Atmos mix on an Atmos capable receiver/processor that is only equipped with a 5.1 or 7.1 speaker setup, the situation is vastly different. In that case, the metadata is fully processed for object sounds which allows the Atmos renderer to place the sounds as accurately as possible within the available speaker setup.

Completely agree, except that with a 5.1 speaker setup the Atmos receiver may not process Atmos, although all the content is beeing played as a 5.1 folded down.

When I did tests with My Denon 8500 to learn about this, removing config speakers to check how an Atmos input was beeing processed, I discover that with only 5.1 the AVR does not recognize Atmos Input and play just multichannel. The minimum 7.1 speakers was needed to recognize Atmos input and process it like that.

 

[srbjab]

I wonder if that behavior is manufacturer/implementation dependent since I thought Atmos rendering was supposed to be completely agnostic regarding the number of speakers setup in the playback system. In other words, it always processes the Atmos mix with metadata and renders it to whatever speakers are available.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I believe the situation is a bit more nuanced. Most Atmos mixes contain sounds in a 7.1 bed plus sounds that are in objects described in metadata. When you playback an Atmos track on a non-atmos capable receiver or processor (which does not process the metadata), the bed based sounds are accurately placed in their expected 7.1/5.1 locations, but the object based sounds are less precisely "folded down" to an approximate 7.1/5.1 position. The fact is, this fold down positioning of object based sounds is inherently less accurate on non-atmos capable systems than metadata processing would be and it may not yield the same result as a dedicated 5.1/7.1 mix would. Since this fold down process is automatic and probably not part of an atmos mixing engineers normal workflow, it probably is a bit hit or miss in terms of resulting accuracy. An Atmos mix that primarily used bed based sounds with little to no panning or 3-d movement and few, if any, object based sounds, should sound pretty good on a non-Atmos system.

Once again. There is no fold down of the objects. The object information is already in the 7.1 floor channels. The metadata identifies it and moves it to where it is intended to be reproduced. On a non Atmos system, it just stays in the floor channels with no further action taken. .

Is it hit or miss? Yes. So much depends on the material and the mixing decisions. All I can say for sure is that I've heard plenty of Atmos tracks, from both disc and streaming, that sound outstanding on a 5.1 system. I'm sure there are outliers.

What sounds poor to my ears is the auto generated 5.1 Dolby Digital stream that is also included on most if not all Atmos discs. That truly sounds like shit compared to the 7.1 lossless.

An Atmos mix that primarily used bed based sounds with little to no panning or 3-d movement and few, if any, object based sounds, should sound pretty good on a non-Atmos system.

A lot of Atmos mixes are exactly like that. Especially some of the early ones.

However, if you play an Atmos mix on an Atmos capable receiver/processor that is only equipped with a 5.1 or 7.1 speaker setup, the situation is vastly different. In that case, the metadata is fully processed for object sounds which allows the Atmos renderer to place the sounds as accurately as possible within the available speaker setup.

I have heard others say this as well, but I have not heard it first hand. I have also heard that a 7.1 setup will activate Atmos processing, but 5.1 setup will not. Again I have no firsthand experience.

Our system is exactly like 5.1 was designed. Atmos on a 5.1 ( 5.3 here) non atmos system truly sounds like shit. I am not going to dress this up any other way.
BOTH of us obviously hear differently...most do, but we still hear the difference, and it's more than obvious to us.

designed by who exactly? Dolby? $$ Funny. A smooth move against DTS. Nothing else but. And a way to get streaming shoved down folks throats. Watching physical media dwindle gets em' giddy. Music rentals. Fed up with the obvious BS. Who exactly is doing all of these wonderful atmos mixes via streaming.. cracks me up.
Maybe Steven Wilson types need to get busier ... (we love that dude)
I will not ignore that it sound like shit on NON atmos equip and speaker 'recommended requirements'. Folks do have ears ..right?

I'm not arguing about what you hear. You hear what you hear. I'm just trying to figure out why others perceive it so differently from you and others like you.

As far as physical media dwindling, I can't agree. I've bought more surround discs in the last 2 years than I did in the previous 5. It's definitely not dwindling according to my wallet. What is dwindling are true 5.1 releases. You can still count on them from Steven Wilson so far, but who knows for how long.

As for streaming, there are plenty of crappy surround mixes out there. But there are some very good ones as well. This new Elton John release is a prime example. It's an excellent mix. Tom Petty greatest hits, Traffic's Low Spark, McCartney's Band on the Run. All superior surround mixes and all of them streaming only right now. I hope they eventually get a disc release.

It's obvious you dislike the current trends with surround music. But Atmos is just the evolution of surround, and that evolution will likely continue.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I wonder if that behavior is manufacturer/implementation dependent since I thought Atmos rendering was supposed to be completely agnostic regarding the number of speakers setup in the playback system. In other words, it always processes the Atmos mix with metadata and renders it to whatever speakers are available.

I would like to know this as well. I have friends with 4.0 quad setups who are looking for the best way to reproduce Atmos. It seems the opinions are all over the place.

 

[himey]

if you play an Atmos mix on an Atmos capable receiver/processor that is only equipped with a 5.1 or 7.1 speaker setup, the situation is vastly different. In that case, the metadata is fully processed for object sounds

Most Atmos receivers set to a 5.1 layout don't decode Atmos.

 

[himey]

It seems the opinions are all over the place.

Someone with an Arcam, I think, said he was getting decoded Atmos with his speaker setup to 5.1.

 

[SeeMoreDigital]

The Marantz Cinema 70s is a 7.1 AVR that can be configured to offer 5.1.2 Atmos and DTS:X...

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Someone with an Arcam, I think, said he was getting decoded Atmos with his speaker setup to 5.1.

Did he offer any comments on how it sounded to him?

 

[LuvMyQuad]

The Marantz Cinema 70s offers 5.1.2 Atmos

My sons Pioneer will do that as well. It can be run as 5.1.2 or 7.1

 

[himey]

My sons Pioneer will do that as well. It can be run as 5.1.2 or 7.1

...but not 5.1?

 

[himey]

Did he offer any comments on how it sounded to him?

I can't remember which thread it was. Most people, including me, thinks decoding sounds better. I use height channels now, but I didn't originally, and I still think the mix is what makes all the difference, and if it is a good one, will sound good in any configuration.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

...but not 5.1?

I' ll have to try it. I give him 7.1 flac rips of Atmos albums to play. I'll have to try giving him a full Atmos enabled mka

 

[LuvMyQuad]

I can't remember which thread it was. Most people, including me, thinks decoding sounds better. I use height channels now, but I didn't originally, and I still think the mix is what makes all the difference, and if it is a good one, will sound good in any configuration.

So true.

 

[himey]

I' ll have to try it. I give him 7.1 flac rips of Atmos albums to play. I'll have to try giving him a full Atmos enabled mka

I have tried 2 Yamaha's and 1 Denon @ 5.1, and they didn't decode only 6 channel speaker layouts.

 

[srbjab]

Once again. There is no fold down of the objects. The object information is already in the 7.1 floor channels. The metadata identifies it and moves it to where it is intended to be reproduced. On a non Atmos system, it just stays in the floor channels with no further action taken. .

Is it hit or miss? Yes. So much depends on the material and the mixing decisions. All I can say for sure is that I've heard plenty of Atmos tracks, from both disc and streaming, that sound outstanding on a 5.1 system. I'm sure there are outliers.

What sounds poor to my ears is the auto generated 5.1 Dolby Digital stream that is also included on most if not all Atmos discs. That truly sounds like shit compared to the 7.1 lossless.


A lot of Atmos mixes are exactly like that. Especially some of the early ones.


I have heard others say this as well, but I have not heard it first hand. I have also heard that a 7.1 setup will activate Atmos processing, but 5.1 setup will not. Again I have no firsthand experience.



I'm not arguing about what you hear. You hear what you hear. I'm just trying to figure out why others perceive it so differently from you and others like you.

As far as physical media dwindling, I can't agree. I've bought more surround discs in the last 2 years than I did in the previous 5. It's definitely not dwindling according to my wallet. What is dwindling are true 5.1 releases. You can still count on them from Steven Wilson so far, but who knows for how long.

As for streaming, there are plenty of crappy surround mixes out there. But there are some very good ones as well. This new Elton John release is a prime example. It's an excellent mix. Tom Petty greatest hits, Traffic's Low Spark, McCartney's Band on the Run. All superior surround mixes and all of them streaming only right now. I hope they eventually get a disc release.

It's obvious you dislike the current trends with surround music. But Atmos is just the evolution of surround, and that evolution will likely continue.

Although I have no reason to doubt what you say about all the original sounds being present in an Atmos mix bed, it strongly implies that there is a prerequisite for any Atmos mix that includes assigning all sounds/tracks to a bed configuration by default. Then later in the process, you can designate a particular sound as part of the bed or as an object with metadata for further manipulation. Unfortunately, the details of how the initial assignment of sounds to a default bed seem very hard to find, and some online info suggests that object based sounds can be completely lost if played back on a non-Atmos capable system. The one thing that does seem to be consistent in the available info is that if you play back an Atmos track on an Atmos capable device, it will output the audio as accurately as possible to the available speakers in the system, regardless of how many there are.

 

[himey]

some online info suggests that object based sounds can be completely lost if played back on a non-Atmos capable system.

Link?

 

[sjcorne]

Although I have no reason to doubt what you say about all the original sounds being present in an Atmos mix bed, it strongly implies that there is a prerequisite for any Atmos mix that includes assigning all sounds/tracks to a bed configuration by default. Then later in the process, you can designate a particular sound as part of the bed or as an object with metadata for further manipulation. Unfortunately, the details of how the initial assignment of sounds to a default bed seem very hard to find, and some online info suggests that object based sounds can be completely lost if played back on a non-Atmos capable system. The one thing that does seem to be consistent in the available info is that if you play back an Atmos track on an Atmos capable device, it will output the audio as accurately as possible to the available speakers in the system, regardless of how many there are.

I suppose this is kind of quibbling over semantics, but what @LuvMyQuad calls the '7.1 floor channels' in his post actually isn't the same thing as a bed. Beds in Atmos go up to 7.1.2 configuration (so you can actually pan to the height speakers within a bed), and when mixing you can opt to use multiple beds or none at all. In fact, unless you have the ADM master file to look at through the visual display in the Dolby Renderer software, the end-user can't really tell for certain whether specific sounds were assigned to an object or a bed.

For all the Atmos albums available to purchase at ImmersiveAudioAlbum.com, I get sent the ADMs by the artist or label in order to create the consumer-playable files sold via the site. Looking at these masters, it is sometimes surprising to see how the mixes have actually been constructed. For instance, Bruce Soord's Luminesence album is composed entirely of objects. So if the claim that object-panned sounds can be completely lost when played on a non-Atmos system were true, then I guess you'd hear nothing at all on that album.

I'm fairly certain that once an Atmos mix is encoded to TrueHD for consumer playback, the whole bed/object thing at the mix stage essentially becomes irrelevant. All the sounds in the mix are 'baked in' to a 7.1 file, but there's some special sauce in there (the infamous 'metadata' we love to talk about here) that allows the information meant for the height and wide channels to parsed out upon playback.

(apologies to everyone who just wants to hear about the Diamonds Blu-Ray release, all this Atmos tech talk will be moved to another thread)

 

[Sonik Wiz]

Yeah.. we do not have a 'fold down' of atmos that sounds worth a damn...but still hoping.

Abbey Road Atmos fold down sounds damn good here in 5.1.