a BD with all versions imaginable, especially including the Atmos (and even the Drumless Atmos!
) would be a dream!! 
Q&A: Elliot Scheiner on Madeleine Peyroux’s Let’s Walk, remixing Steely Dan in 5.1 surround sound, and more! (IAA)
- Thread starter sjcorne
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
) would be a dream!! 
I do believe that both can be appropriate for music. The differences reside, in addition to the mix itself, in the different system one may have at his room. The heights/tops are important, and good bookshelfs at Auro locations can give better sound than if you have lower quality “in-ceiling” speakers for Atmos. This is exactly my experience with both types of speakers in my room. Scheiner even talks about the height speakers not being full range in his studio.
If the artistic approach Elliot Scheiner has is to try to reproduce the scene as if the listener is “inside " the band, that’s why he is more keen to Auro-3D. That is exactly what Auro-3D conceived for music, to reproduce 3D space with the fidelity that the dual-quad microphone array can provide.
The artistic criteria of aggressive effects of panning and ping-pong of sounds, which some of us catch our attention and like enormously, since they do not represent the reality of a concert, do not seem to be to the Scheiner liking. But that kind of mix can be also delivered in Auro-3D, Mando Diao’s Aelita (Auro-3D) is an example.
Without considering the issue of the level of Hi-Res that Auro vs Atmos can achieve in its consumer formats, I do believe that Dolby Atmos is appropriate for music, since dual-quad microphone array recording can also be applied to Dolby Atmos.
I have both Atmos 9.1.4 and Auro-3D systems with alternative speakers in their correct position for Auro 13.1. I have a reference, Big Fat Band's The Gordian Knot Blu-ray which has both Atmos and Auro tracks. The mix is Scheiner style, placing the listener in the middle of the band, and I like the Atmos version better than the Auro version, may be because I find more spatial detail thanks to the Wides on my 9.1.4
I listened to it again in advance of the interview and some aspects of the mix are pretty stunning, like the front/back drums in "Mainline Florida" and harmony vocals hard-panned in the back corners throughout "Please Be With Me." But then you have a few awkward moments, like the synth circling the room at the end of "Let It Grow" that feels kind of out of place and gimmicky to me (I think that's the only moving element across the entire album?). I also thought the lead vocals - which are mostly in the front channels rather than the center, as is typical in his mixes - seem a bit veiled on a few tracks, whereas they're really clear and upfront in the Guzauski version.
ah yes, at the risk of being boring on the forum, as usual, i find we are largely in agreement on such Surround-y matters!
the front-back drums of Scheiner's mix are indeed totally wonderful and rather Quad-like in the presentation!
really, to have three (!) distinct and unique Surround mixes of a Classic album, even if not one of the mixes is quote-unquote 'perfect', as is the case with Eric Clapton's "461 Ocean Boulevard", is a real boon and there's definitely appropriate and worthwhile mixing going on in places in the Quad and in Mick Guzauski's 5.1 and in Mr. Scheiner's 5.1.
an amalgamation of the virtues of all 3 mixes, in Atmos, preferably by Mr. Scheiner himself, would be the dream!!
461 OB's nowhere near his best work imho but then for me neither is his mix of "Layla".. although i'm not sure there's much more that can be done with that one tbh and i suspect it's another Classic album hamstrung by limitations of the original recording.
"Nightfly", "Gaucho", "Homecoming", "Winelight" are my Gold Standard by which all other Surround music mixes get judged!
If all the various mixes that have come out of them are something to go by, I think the original Layla multitracks are probably a bit of a dog's dinner - not a lot of low end extension or top-end smoothness, so it's no surprise that Scheiner's mix isn't one of his best. The (sonic) situation also isn't helped by the wrong-headed decision by whoever mastered the 5.1 to introduce some really unnecessary brickwall limiting into the mix - I think the intention is to give these old mixes more "power" because they don't have a lot of inherent thump, but the end result just sounds like an AM radio turned up so loud that the speaker is distorting.
Speaking of Tom Dowd, who produced those Layla sessions, my favourite mix of 461 Ocean Blvd. is his quad mix. The tonality of the Scheiner mix may be a little smoother (as seems to be the case with most of Scheiner's mixes, and a massively underrated facet of his work) but there's something about the 4-cornered-ness of the Dowd quad mix that I like better, not to mention it having more of the vibe of the original stereo mix as well. I also really like how the double-drum tracks in the quad mix like Motherless Children not only have the kits totally split one-front/one-back, but they also have them mixed as mirror images of each other in terms of left-to-right panning. So the front kit has the snare drum offset slightly to one side of phantom center, and the rear kit has the snare drum offset to the other side, for example, which (for me anyway, visualising it) gives the impression of literally being in the middle of two drummers facing each other.
I would add Donald Fagen – Kamakiriad to that list for sure."Nightfly", "Gaucho", "Homecoming", "Winelight" are my Gold Standard by which all other Surround music mixes get judged!
With all the SD and DF titles having these great Scheiner 5.1 mixes, you'd think Donald would be all for it. I just don't get why he soured on it all. Sunken Condos would be another great one to have in surround/Atmos/AURO3D, whatever. Maybe something changed in his heart when his old compadre Walter Becker passed, IDK.
I second that Kamakiriad nomination. Let's add Morph the Cat and expand @fredblue's list to an even dozen!
Still not clear to me that Fagen is actively nixing or even dismissing the idea of immersive audio; I think it's more likely he just can't be arsed. From what little Scheiner said, it sounds more like Irving Azoff (speaking of arses) is calling the shots and using the royal "we." But if, as Scheiner suggests, UMG have also cooled on throwing Atmos money at catalog titles, then that would be a very bad thing.
hafquark
400 Club - QQ All-Star
And add Toy Matinee to make it a baker's dozen
I just caught up with this thread. Congratulations to Johnathan on an awesome interview with a mixing legend.
Sunken Condos in surround? Yes, please...immediate purchase for me and many others I'm sure!
Regarding all the talk of debunking rumored 5.1 mixes of the past, I really was surprised to hear him say that Band of Horses' Infinite Arms wasn't done after all (or at least that he "didn't recall"). The press release the band put out in 2010 is still up online, and it mentions in no uncertain terms that the deluxe edition was supposed to include a DVD with surround:
Jonathan, I finally, today over coffee, read your interview. This was your best yet (target rich territory doesn't hurt I guess ) and I was in awe of your notes, recollections and detailed questions. It's doubly great that he had such vivid memories of some of this stuff and could articulate them. I, too, have sooo many of his mixes in my top ten 5.1 library, leading with Sea Change and followed closely by Kamakiriad.
Anyway...great interview and article, Jonathan!
Anyway...great interview and article, Jonathan!
Fantastic interview, Jonathan! 5.1 music seemed so mysterious when I first discovered it. There was so little of it available in NZ. Reading this adds a lot of great context to the PT and Beck mixes I loved so much
