HiRez Poll R.E.M. - AUTOMATIC FOR THE PEOPLE (25TH ANNIVERSARY DOLBY ATMOS MIX) [Blu-Ray Audio]

[Perp]

Hey Mike, I've had a look and yes, it is indicating TrueHD to seven channels, and output to five. I am getting music in the rears, but maybe the vocals are just mixed too loud for my tastes. Would you be able to try out Find The River and then play some of the stereo mix and see if the vocals seem much relatively higher in the Atmos mix?

May I ask, which AVR are you using?

 

[Franklin]

(Above answered via DM)

I've started going back and forth a bit between this and the ES mix and it appears to be six of one and half a dozen of the other so far, although I'm only listening in 5.0. My first impression is that I much prefer the Atmos mix of Drive, although the vocals don't sit well in the mix for me as they start off too loud for my taste and then seem to get a bit burried when the the track gets louder. The drums sound really good though. The vocal treatment between the two mixes of Try Not To Breathe sound significantly different too. I think I prefer the sound of the vocals of the 2017 mix, but prefer other elements of the ES mix. I'm not keen on the ES placement of the chank-chank guitar in the rear right for Sidewinder, but then I wasn't massively taken with the 2017 mix either. I've only got as far as Everybody Hurts - ES mix on as I type (and I've compared Find the River previously) - and I really preferred the ES mix until the drums came in which I thought sounded a bit weedy.

I am considering taking the centre channel out of the system as I think it is the weakest part, and maybe if I recallibrate from scratch without it I might lose some of the issues I get with vocals on some mixes. It's interesting to hear different surround approaches to the same album, and I can't say I've got a clear favourite out of these two mixes so far.

 

[H.A.L.]

Just upgraded to Atmos -- like today, after a frustrating morning spent with new speakers and banana plugs, you know what I mean! -- and played R.E.M.'s AUTOMATIC for the show trial. Impressed! Previously with my 7.2 I liked it, but preferred the Scheiner mix. Not now! The heights DO make the difference!

Voted 9 as I'm still trying Atmos out. . . . Will say that "Night Swimming" was really affecting in Atmos. . . .

First impressions: who needs wides? But, hmm, with wides . . .

 

[edisonbaggins]

Just upgraded to Atmos -- like today, after a frustrating morning spent with new speakers and banana plugs, you know what I mean!

Welcome to the family!

 

[Franklin]

Has anyone compared the vocals on Find The River between the ES and the Atmos mixes? I also thought with Nightswimming they didn't sit in the mix comfortably. I don't think it can be laid down to downmixing unless information that should be in the extra channels is being sent to the front or being lost, but not all of the tracks seem to have this vocal level issue on my system.

 

[H.A.L.]

Been a while since I listened to the Scheiner, but I'll do an A / B when I have the chance. I _did_ notice a peculiar "warble" on "Try Not to Breathe" in the ATMOS mix -- wondered at first if a speaker was vibrating, but it never happened again. May have been on the original mix and hidden; at any rate, it was distracting.

"Nightswimming" seemed gorgeous to me -- the vocal was down a bit in the mix, yes, but to me it gave it a quiet, reflective feel. YMMV.

 

[Franklin]

"Nightswimming" seemed gorgeous to me -- the vocal was down a bit in the mix, yes, but to me it gave it a quiet, reflective feel. YMMV.

Apparently it does vary as I thought it was too high!

 

[edisonbaggins]

Listening in native Atmos, 7.2.4, I heard no imbalances. Doesn't mean there aren't any - just nothing jumped out at me, struck me as odd or wrong or disappointed me.
It's a very different experience from the ES 5.1 mix. In some ways "better" for me. Less in-your-face clarity and separation, for a more subtle immersion, to the point of vastness, at times.

 

[Franklin]

I imagine the wider immersion I'm missing could be very nice, but I can't see the justfication in terms of room size or cost to upgrade to Atmos at present.

 

[fredblue]

(Above answered via DM)

I've started going back and forth a bit between this and the ES mix and it appears to be six of one and half a dozen of the other so far, although I'm only listening in 5.0. My first impression is that I much prefer the Atmos mix of Drive, although the vocals don't sit well in the mix for me as they start off too loud for my taste and then seem to get a bit burried when the the track gets louder. The drums sound really good though. The vocal treatment between the two mixes of Try Not To Breathe sound significantly different too. I think I prefer the sound of the vocals of the 2017 mix, but prefer other elements of the ES mix. I'm not keen on the ES placement of the chank-chank guitar in the rear right for Sidewinder, but then I wasn't massively taken with the 2017 mix either. I've only got as far as Everybody Hurts - ES mix on as I type (and I've compared Find the River previously) - and I really preferred the ES mix until the drums came in which I thought sounded a bit weedy.

I am considering taking the centre channel out of the system as I think it is the weakest part, and maybe if I recallibrate from scratch without it I might lose some of the issues I get with vocals on some mixes. It's interesting to hear different surround approaches to the same album, and I can't say I've got a clear favourite out of these two mixes so far.

(just a quick "fwiw" and only in a 5.1 context since i'm not even setup for 7.1 these days let alone Atmos) when i took the Centre speaker out of the equation i found that certain 5.1 mixes that utilised the Centre channel more than most (incl., the Elton John SACDs, some tracks on the Billy Joel SACDs, some of the Queen 5.1 mixes, the Michael McDonald Motown 1 & 2 5.1's, various Steven Wilson surround mixes) it seemed that Centre channel info became a bit louder when downmixed into the Front L&R. how much of that was down to setup, i don't know? anyway.. just thought i'd mention it!

 

[Franklin]

I really appreciate that, Adam. Did you recallibrate afterwards? I wonder if your centre speaker was less efficient or whatever it might just have sent what was already set for that channel to the front pair? On my amp if I switch the centre out it doesn't let me control the level of the centre channel in the amp settings, so I assume it either locks out what was already set or ideally ignores previous EQ, distance, & level settings and just lets the front pair setting deal with it. That said, I'm still running a centre channel at the moment and it's not all tracks on the Atmos Automatic that I have an issue with for vocal levels/sitting in the mix. I'm wondering if there's some kind of dynamic compression issue that's not working together with other channels or maybe some kind of reverb thing on the vocals in the mix alongside the level that's not always working for me.

 

[Franklin]

Listening more, I like both the mixes of New Orleans Instrumental No. 1: obviously different, but both agreeable to my taste. I can imagine this one could be particularly nice in Atmos. Sweetness Follows I didn't listen to closely, but my current thought is that I prefer the ES mix. I also preferred ES' mix of Monty Got A Raw Deal.

 

[JimHansonDC]

The first thing is they didn't do anything silly with the height speakers and overall there is nothing in the mix to pull you out of the songs. They occasionally throw a lead bit up off the ground and there are a number of percussion accessories and and other effects type sounds up there. But mostly they just used the additional space to air the songs out.

I'm not a huge REM fan, but this is a really good record and they did it credit. I saw some folks say it was less cold and I would agree. Don't know if they made a conscious effort or if it was a result of being able to let all the lows and mids fully play without having to amp down or eq holes to get certain bits forward in the mix.

My set up is 7.2.4 and pretty acoustically clean with room treatment and a Trinnov doing room optimizing so I figure I get a pretty good feel for what they're aiming for. This disc sounded like they had the good sense to just get out of the way and let the music play. The videos w/ full Atmos mix were cool and the CD of the one live show they did to support the record sounded like it would have been a good time to see.

 

[Franklin]

I really liked much of the live CD, and I'm not really one for live albums.

 

[harync]

Had a chance to do a pretty thorough comparison, and my biggest take home is that the Atmos mix uses the heights at the expense of the surrounds. I noted very few surround effects while solos would often be localized in the front height speakers in my 5.2.4 set-up. One description I have read of Atmos is that it is trying to create a dome of sound. I feel that this album emphasizes the front half of the dome. Scheiner's mix is more enveloping for me in that regard. I always liked the percussion coming out of the surrounds on "Try Not to Breath" (despite the clear gaff). I also played the album in my non-Atmos 5.1 set-up and it was very disappointing. If one does not have an AVR that can decode Atmos, I think Scheiner's mix is the way to go.

 

[Franklin]

I also played the album in my non-Atmos 5.1 set-up...

Thanks for this, and welcome to the forum!

 

[TheAbsentMind]

Long story short, today I’ve taken my 7.1 system and Frankensteined it into a 7.1.2 just to play with ATMOS at home for the first time. I wrote what’s below initially as part of this this long post in an ATMOS thread.

Most of what’s below is what I observed listening to the heights, sides, rears and sub. For a few tracks I listened only to heights. No mains/fronts at all. Why? Well, I know this album too well and get lost in it so this made it easier for me to stay focused, even if artificially. More importantly, perhaps, is that I’m not an innately (or practiced) analytical listener. For me to be able to understand this mix I needed to eliminate or limit the elements I’m most overly familiar with and this seemed like the easiest way to sort of fake that within my ability.

That means it’s not remotely a review of the mix as it’s intended to be listened to. You could argue that my observations either argue that this is too similar or inferior to Scheiner’s 5.1. I make no such claims. This is mainly a byproduct of my curiosity and I thought I’d share it. I have not voted and would not use this particular listening experiment as part of that calculation precisely because I’m listening to it in a very artificial manner that focuses on the parts, not the whole.

1. Drive becomes a near-instrumental with heretofore invisible elements of the spring arrangement suddenly new.
2. Try Not to Breathe has an empty intro that eventually yields to a strumming and organ accompanied instrumental with just enough lead vocal bleed that incidentally suits the ghostly subject matter. When the various backing vocals haunt the later sections of the track they do so up front and discretely between sides and mid. Incredibly potent. Turning on the mains it’s not hard to imagine how that lead vocal creates the “dome effect” when accompanying the equally level backing. Very tasteful, in my opinion.
3. Sidewinder remains a pop confection with so many of its elements still up front. Not terribly subtle and very apt for song as colorfulfly flat as a drawing by Dr. Zeuss (sic). It almost feels like “big stereo” but with that intent, not out of laziness or inattention.
4. Everybody Hurts seems mixed similarly to Try Not to Breathe above with lead vocals being as if amplified from a distant cathedral and arpeggiated lead accompanying right beside me the whole time, the acoustic guitars patting my shoulder. Eventually an orchestral wash and drums sit in the middle distance of the front while plucked strings drip beside me. Soon enough after, the electric guitar and drums kick in from all around, including nice rear activity with enough echo it’s clear that with the mains back on it’s strictly accentual punch. The best word I can use to describe this mix is “sympathetic” to the song’s message.
5. New Orleans Instrumental... nice to hear the countdown from the rear. Even with the fronts represented just by the heights, it’s clear this eerie transitional instrumental is front driven and not terribly dynamic. Makes sense for such a minor track that seems to be more about plaintively melancholy mood than anything else.
6. Sweetness Follows has become increasingly my (second) favorite track on this album in the last decade. It’s mix places the wavering drone in the front, the acoustic strum on the sides. The lead vocal bleeds into the heights for that “dome effect” (as I i8nerpret it. The rear channel unearths Stipe’s high harmony during some sections. Nice to hear it more clearly than in its buried stereo mix. Eventually, the wash of distorted guitars surrounds the listener with the leads still looking down from above. This one I listened to again with all channels on and all I can say is it feels immense. I was twenty when this album came out in 1992 and this song didn’t mean much to me. Mid-album filler. Now, in 2019 it reminds of John Prine’s “Hello in There” as a song that surpasses the age of its composer(s).
7. Monty Got a Raw Deal puts drier vocals in the heights than anything since Sidewinder. The bass is immense. Slightly industrial percussion (and occasional harmonies) sits behind me, accordions walk beside me and sleigh bells seem to fly from above.
8. Igoreland. Always and forever my least favorite track on the album (though the last three years have breathed new life into it for me). Like Sidewinder this feels like organized and discrete while in service of something like advanced “big stereo.” Not a dig so much as hearing through the arrangement and mix that this song is supposed to attack from all directions, including above.
9. The droning Ahhs of Star Me Kitten now eerily waver between the rears like the stuff of nightmares. Ignoreland’s buried acoustic guitar comes in and out. This was a song I always used to skip. William S. Burrough’s creaking, croaky “talking over the album version” on the X-Files soundtrack didn’ quite endear me. That changed a decade ago. A marvelously spooky track that takes me back to Country Feedback off their previous album. Back to the mix, the vocal is prominent but echo laden from above. Organ and snaps are up there, too. The sides seem intentionally empty to my ears.
10. Man on the Moon. Wow, What sounds like a bum electric guitar note hits me in the face from left surround at first. THe sides are where the guitar lives and it’s great to my ears. Once the vocals come in, Stipe’s lead and the backing “oohs” seem full-bodied on the sides. Stipe to the left, Mills & Berry to the right. The heights are tame for the first time since I put this on. To my ears, this is a largely “ground level” mix but with plenty in the sides and constant light activity in the rear. Midway through I removed everything but the heights to discover the lead and high harmony plenty present up there as well as the electric guitar lead and the mandolin. During the bridge “here’s a pit stop” the vocals become incredibly present and warm with lead and harmony more intimate than I’ve ever heard. Toggling the rears back on and Berry’s drums can be heard clearly as if from down an unobstructed street. This is all to say, it’s just a very layered mix that was unnoticeable to me when listening to the full mix — partly because my setup’s reach exceeds its grasp and partly because I’m not used to this.
11. Nightswimming. For this I went straight to heights and sub. Piano and vocal are similar to the full mix, as if a vocalist standing beside the piano. Neat music trivia: the piano used in this is the very same one used for Layla’s coda. Throw in John Paul Jones’ string arrangement and this song is a classic rocker’s wet dream — except somehow R.E.M. never seemed to appeal to that crowd. Anyhow. Listening to just heights and sub, I hear almost every element in similar balance. The clarinet (?) is significantly louder when it makes its cameo but otherwise this feels like listening to the full mix on small speakers. I assume mainly “dome effect” until that woodwind. I think it’s a woodwind.
12. Find the River. I confess that I didn’t listen to much of this song for this missive. Put simply, the song occupies a uniquely important place in my heart and I didn’t want to analyze it too closely. Suffice it to say the opening is largely in the heights. Lead vocals are a faraway echo. The high harmonies take front and center with the acoustic guitars. Toggling the rears back on (so it’s just them, the heights and sub) is all reverb. Toggling on the sides returns the piano, shakers and other elements. Utterly gorgeous and — again — sympathetic mix.

 

[zimmy]

I have now upgraded my system with an Marantz SR8012 amplifier, an Pioneer UDP-LX500 Bluray player and two KEF r50 as atmos speakers. The KEF speakers were an really important part as they are placed above my Dali front speakers pointing upwards to the roof. I can not even think about the option to place speakers in the roof..
When i now listen to the disc which i bought when it was released i must say i am hugely impressed!
Before i felt that i couldn´t tell if any improvement had been done compared to the DVD-release.
Now there is no question about it. This sounds fantastic!

 

[hotRocks1061977]

On my system, I did not find the Atmos mix bright nor digital sounding at all. For me, if anything, the 4 songs included on the “In Time” DVD-A Of “Automatic For The People” were a bit bright but not necessarily bad or fatiguing.

My system does have the ability and is set up for Atmos. Right now, it’s set up as a 5.3.2 system. I went from using two overhead speakers in my old place of residence to using two speakers as upfiring. Not sure when or if I’ll return to ceiling mounted speakers because I’m okay with the diffused sound and don’t like to put holes in the ceiling or wires being visible on the walls. Someday, I would love it if in the future a speaker manufacturer would develope a wireless speaker that would be worth it on sound quality and size. Then, maybe, I may revisit placing speakers on the ceiling.

After comparing those 4 tracks included on their best of album off the DVD-A, I listened to the entire best of DVD-A to get a feel for how all the songs were mixed from the various Warner Bros. R.E.M. albums. After that was done, I listened to “Automatic For The People” BD in Atmos. After one listen all the way through, including the bonus track, I was very happy with what I had just heard. I kept telling myself that this is the best surround experience with music I’ve ever heard. As I stated in the other, non-poll Thread, the soundstage was huge. The instruments and voices all have dimension around them and are so clear. It sounds like I’m sitting in a concert hall live with the band. I’ve never experienced this before, even with the new Inxs album mixed in Atmos. Although, to be fair, I’ve only listened to it a couple of times and I would need to compare the two. Yes, this mix does have a more up front presentation but it’s not like there isn’t any discrete sound in the rear speakers. There is, but not like the “In Time” compilation. Some songs have it more than others. The one thing that I found is that some of the instruments or vocals are a little too loud or not loud enough and some of the songs are louder than others. I have to really crank up the volume on this one. Though, probably a good thing.

If I rated this album solely on what can be achieved with the sound quality of Dolby Atmos, I would give it a 10. The mix, I would give an 8 because of the reason I listed above. This is not one of my favorite albums but the good songs outweigh the mediocre ones. So, I would give it a 7 for the original album on music selection. Btw, I love the bonus track and I’m not a fan of Natalie Merchant but their harmonies are great together and I would have loved to hear more songs with the two of them together. Overall, based on what I’ve heard, I would vote a solid 8. I told myself that I was no longer going to vote in the polls because of the last The Doors fiasco (in my mind anyway), but have had a change of heart. But, before I push that button and cast my vote, I want to give it one more listen.

5.3.2 are you sure? this Implies 5 surround speakers 3 x subwoofers and 2 heights.

 

[PmikeK]

HUGE disappointment.