Listening to Now (In Dolby Atmos)

Find deals on ebay
Amazon
Advertise with us
QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
jaybird100 said:
I've played it through the Surround Master. Unbelievable!
Click to expand...
I have always believed that a lot of "modern" mixes are actually DPLII encoded in a way...
In this case, maybe it isn't but my educated guess is that , if it decodes really well with the SM , there is a LOT of out of phase info in the stereo mix which in a way is the guys in ABBA doing "their version" of a "surround mix"...so much for them stating "we do not believe in Surround"... oh well...
 
himey said:
Have you listened to the Atmos mix? It is on my to-do list but haven't listened yet.
Click to expand...

ATMOS mix not bad, but certainly not the best out there. I think the punters reaction on here regarding the ATMOS was also tempered by the quality of the album content itself. Most were hoping for Arrival #2- myself included.
 
kap'n krunch said:
I have always believed that a lot of "modern" mixes are actually DPLII encoded in a way...
In this case, maybe it isn't but my educated guess is that , if it decodes really well with the SM , there is a LOT of out of phase info in the stereo mix which in a way is the guys in ABBA doing "their version" of a "surround mix"...so much for them stating "we do not believe in Surround"... oh well...
Click to expand...
According to their engineer (Michael B. Tretow), he, Bjorn, and Benny are not interested in mixing in surround. They don't feel it's needed. Any surround effects we get from their albums are purely random. Michael was very adamant about the subject. I wish I had saved my email exchange with him. If I could suggest another track that sounds great when decoded, "Should I Laugh or Cry" is amazing in DPL2, or the Involve mode of the SM.
 
kap'n krunch said:
I have always believed that a lot of "modern" mixes are actually DPLII encoded in a way...
In this case, maybe it isn't but my educated guess is that , if it decodes really well with the SM , there is a LOT of out of phase info in the stereo mix which in a way is the guys in ABBA doing "their version" of a "surround mix"...so much for them stating "we do not believe in Surround"... oh well...
Click to expand...

I'm not using DPLII, neither I have SM, but when enabling DSU upmixer in quite a lot of Stereo CDs they perform very good with really discrete sounds going to the rears.

I have always wonder if the mixing 'out of phase' for stereo to sound good and deep is just casuality or it is done intentionally using matrix techniques to take profit of the different up-mixer technology around.
 
I listen to everything via Dolby or DTS upmixers (it's a rare occasion for me to listen to anything for enjoyment in pure stereo) and have also often wondered why some stereo recordings upmix very convincingly while others show little enhancement. Mostly I cannot predict which stereo recordings will upmix well or poorly just by listening to them in 2 channel, although those with the greatest channel separation seem to generally upmix better. Have sound engineers quantified exactly what in a stereo recording upmixes well, and what does not, without affecting the stereo sound played back in 2 channel? It's also unclear whether the quality of the upmixer or the character of the recording makes the most difference. It's just a shame that all stereo recordings aren't done in a way that better supports upmixing. Since I paid for all these speakers and amps, I want to hear them ALL the time.
 
image.jpg

Interested in C-Pop? There is a ton of Atmos music in Chinese under Lunar New Year!
 
20220129_141821.jpg

Listening via Smyth Realiser A16 with my 24 Channel Dutch and Dutch 8c... Fabulous!

Lots of action going on...

Screenshot_20220129-191453_Gallery.jpg
 
Last edited:
srbjab said:
I listen to everything via Dolby or DTS upmixers (it's a rare occasion for me to listen to anything for enjoyment in pure stereo) and have also often wondered why some stereo recordings upmix very convincingly while others show little enhancement. Mostly I cannot predict which stereo recordings will upmix well or poorly just by listening to them in 2 channel, although those with the greatest channel separation seem to generally upmix better. Have sound engineers quantified exactly what in a stereo recording upmixes well, and what does not, without affecting the stereo sound played back in 2 channel? It's also unclear whether the quality of the upmixer or the character of the recording makes the most difference. It's just a shame that all stereo recordings aren't done in a way that better supports upmixing. Since I paid for all these speakers and amps, I want to hear them ALL the time.
Click to expand...
One thing is how different instruments are panned. A lot of older recordings are all over the place and upmix very well (with software-I don't really use the upmix modes on the AVR a lot)
I don't know how well it will upmix with the AVR functions, but with SPEC & Plogue Bidule older stuff such as Spirit - The Twelve Dreams of Dr Sardonicus is amazing.
Any of the Phil Specter "wall of sound" crap sucks as far as separation (my opinion).
 
 
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

austinsignal
What a day! Trinnov-Meyer-Portland Audio listening...
Replies
0
Views
310
austinsignal
austinsignal
Z
Tidal plays in Atmos but Amazon Music HD plays in Ultra HD (which is not real Atmos)?
Replies
4
Views
3K
humprof
humprof
M
Bizet: Carmen (Claudio Abbado, 1977) Blu-ray Audio with Dolby Atmos + 192/24 DTS-HD MA 5.1 and 2.0
Replies
5
Views
3K
northernsoul
northernsoul
HomerJAU
  • Sticky
Dolby Atmos® FAQ
11 12 13
Replies
247
Views
43K
barfle
barfle
E
Quad / 5.1 / Atmos #1 Hits 1964-1991
2
Replies
37
Views
27K
Blackwood
Blackwood

Latest posts

Back
Top