Universal Music to Remix Thousands of Songs Into Dolby Atmos

QuadraphonicQuad

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
While the 'prospects' sound enticing for those who are currently equipped to handle 7.1 Dolby Atmos in their home systems, my question would be the actual DOLBY ATMOS Standard for dolby~atmos equipped movie theaters was 62[!] speakers and the recent D~A demo at the Capitol studios utilized 16 speakers [why 16?] so what are they trying to sell us. Is this another MQA~like enticement to sell more music....and hardware?

As we at QQ forum are well aware, it has been a long, tough and IMO, rather fruitless effort to sell Joe Q. Public on 5.1 systems for their homes/vehicles. And while more modern receivers are equipped to handle up to 11:2 speakers, there is NO current software, AFAIK, to properly test such a system. Auro 3D [9:2] remains the closest.

So theoretically, will mixing down 16 channels of music to 7:1 be even feasible with current technology if this what the Capitol Studios demo 'suggests?'

And will [gulp!] Meridian's MQA play a part in 'streaming' [squeezing?] all those channels over the internet to our home computer devices?

Yes, DOLBY ATMOS music would be wonderful for older and of course more current music 'remixes....' but are consumers who have been unwilling to even go the 5.1 route buy into this latest enticement from Universal Music which in the not so distant past certainly botched their Blu Ray Audio launch?

Dolby is also looking to entice 'other labels' meaning, I assume, Warner and SONY ......... but even if they do sign on will DOLBY ATMOS for MUSIC become as mainstream as DOLBY LABS is anticipating? And what uber~talented remix engineers are going to be tasked with the remixes and what picking and choosing of back catalogue and newer material will 'enjoy' the D~A upgrade. Sounds like another QUAD/5.1 potential disaster to me...in terms of execution.

Stay tuned for this ONE!
ya I agree but one question, I have a phone that can do 5g it is capable of Dolby Atmos, there is a selection in the menu for it??? Samsung Galaxy j3 v
 
Remember when the morons tried to make DualDisc the ultimate replacement for DVD-A's and SACD's, and there were a ton of announcements of "hundreds of titles" being prepared for DualDisc release?

Ya
If there is one thing I have learned in this hobby, it is that announcements and predictions do not always pan out. Where is my Are You Experienced SACD? Where is my Five Leaves Left surround mix? Pink Floyd Animals & Obscured By Clouds? Even things that are finished go unreleased. I almost didn't read this thread because much "future talk" does not pan out.

OK, so let's see what actually comes out, and how it sounds. Talking about the REM disc that is in people's hands (and ears) seems like a more valuable use of my time. On that note, has anyone listened to the Automatic for the People Atmos mix on a 5.1 system, and what are the results?
 
Human intervention...there will be a human at the controls...but having said that...with more channels...there will be more latitude about where instruments are placed....I'm sure some on here will be distraught...I can imagine the posts now...."why did they put the drums on channel 9...it's right over my head" :whistle:

Wishful thinking? Or do you have an inside source?

Paying quality engineer's to remix a thousand songs would be very costly. Call me skeptical but I don't think it will happen.

Reminds me of the shf thread a couple years ago when the shill for MQA, leeS, was going on about how he knows thousands of albums are going to be remastered for the format. When asked about how many sound engineer's it will take to perform this process all I got was silence. Using simple math it just didn't add up...
 
MQA is a codec. It takes no more of a mastering engineer than making an MP3 does. There are thousands of remasters for SACD or high-res that would presumably be a simple file conversion.
 
I've been searching for info about how Dolby Atmos is downmixed (I have a 4.0 system for now).

5.1 Dolby Digital Dolby Labs specified downmix to (original) Dolby Surround discards the LFE
channel (which I never understood) and adds LS an RS to make S.

Is there info (metadata) in each Dolby Atmos mix that specifies how it will be downmixed or
does the user configure their Dolby Atmos decoding device based on how many playback
channels they have?

Kirk Bayne
 
Wishful thinking? Or do you have an inside source?

Paying quality engineer's to remix a thousand songs would be very costly. Call me skeptical but I don't think it will happen.

Reminds me of the shf thread a couple years ago when the shill for MQA, leeS, was going on about how he knows thousands of albums are going to be remastered for the format. When asked about how many sound engineer's it will take to perform this process all I got was silence. Using simple math it just didn't add up...

As you have seen Steve's post...he is working on Atmos mixes in the studio at Nashville...of course I'm skeptical about the numbers they are talking about as well...it will probably depend on sales...
 
Then, of course, there's a whole 'nother competing system vying for recognition in the marketplace: DTS:X https://www.cnet.com/news/dts-x-the-dolby-atmos-alternative-explained/

Since DTS did cause a stir in the 90's when it introduced surroundophiles to the joys of DTS encoded CDs and was the more preferred codec competing with Dolby Digital 5.1 for motion picture soundtracks on DVD and laserdisc, I wonder if they will launch their own music based remix program to compete with Universal/Dolby Atmos' new launch.

They say competition is a good thing
......... and prior to DOLBY's intended domination of ATMOS for MUSIC becomes a reality, will DTS which was a force to reckon with in the 90's, attempt to once again compete with its rival by releasing DTS:X music based content of their own?



See the source image
 
It hints of streaming-only or -mostly

I’m very positive on this but if it’s Streaming Only I won’t buy anything. If it’s Downloading I’m definitely in.

Just to clarify the difference:
Streaming means the music is located in the cloud on someone else’s server. You need to connect to it over the internet to play it in real time (Netflix style). You don’t own the content. It may disappear in the future if their server is switched off.

Downloading means you do a once off download to your system. You get to keep the file forever.
 
The streaming route would be interesting. This means they would have to compress the heck out of it. As a consumer, I wouldn’t want that. And, that’s coming from someone who listens to Apple Music quite regularly.
 
As you have seen Steve's post...he is working on Atmos mixes in the studio at Nashville...of course I'm skeptical about the numbers they are talking about as well...it will probably depend on sales...

I was the first to like it ;) That would be great if my skepticism is proven wrong and we are able to stream thousands of tracks in Atmos, even lossy.
 
Reminds me of the shf thread a couple years ago when the shill for MQA, leeS, was going on about how he knows thousands of albums are going to be remastered for the format. When asked about how many sound engineer's it will take to perform this process all I got was silence.

Looks like 4 Atmos studios at Capitol Studios - its happening!

From the Steve Genewick thread here:
Yes, I am very involved in the Atmos mixing we are doing here and in our Nashville studios. We have 2 rooms on line now, and two more being built as we speak. I can't tell you how much fun it is to mix in this format.
 
The streaming route would be interesting. This means they would have to compress the heck out of it. As a consumer, I wouldn’t want that. And, that’s coming from someone who listens to Apple Music quite regularly.

That's why I mentioned Meridian's MQA which 'supposedly' restores all those frequencies for streaming/downloading.

Wonder if Universal/DOLBY will release BD~As for those averse to streaming/downloading. A BD~A is capable of holding literally hours of uncompressed music and IMO, would be preferable, at least for me.
 
I’m very positive on this but if it’s Streaming Only I won’t buy anything. If it’s Downloading I’m definitely in.

Just to clarify the difference:
Streaming means the music is located in the cloud on someone else’s server. You need to connect to it over the internet to play it in real time (Netflix style). You don’t own the content. It may disappear in the future if their server is switched off.

Downloading means you do a once off download to your system. You get to keep the file forever.

I can't see myself just buying a song and not an album. I might buy a subscription if I could stream thousands, even with lossy compression. I rarely stream now...
 
Back
Top