It is amazing to have all these new tools and options, but they should be at the service of the content; they don’t all have to be used all the time! For instance, if someone is happier with their lead vocal as a phantom center (playing out of the left and right speakers and not a center channel), then they should not feel obliged to do anything different . . . The same goes for some of the newer options: height/ceiling channels, moving objects, binaural renderer settings, and the list goes on. At the moment, due in part to good intentions, many labels and distributors impose restrictions on what can be accepted as an immersive release, which for the most part is content in a Dolby Atmos container (I call it a container as you don’t have to mix in Dolby Atmos to release in Dolby Atmos). Some labels require height channels, some labels require objects, and some set restrictions on binaural metadata. There may be best practices, and there are always bad choices that can be made, but we should not be required to use something for the sake of it. This does not lead to a better product; we do not need sound everywhere in order for the experience to be immersive.
Another unfortunate reality is that of data compression. For forty years, many have been bemoaning the quality of CD audio. In the late 1990s, CD sales plummeted with the rise of file sharing (low-quality, lossy-compressed audio), followed by the rise of digital sales and streaming distributors. Since then, the quality level has come back up to where most platforms now support 24bit audio, often marketed as the artist’s true intent or studio quality. Yet, now with immersive streaming, we are back to significant data compression: In the case of Dolby Atmos, our multichannel immersive deliverables are squeezed into a bit rate equivalent to that of a stereo CD. What consumers hear at home can be worlds apart from what is heard in the studio — not that a sizeable difference between the studio and home is anything new, but it is nonetheless disappointing in 2023.
