That should be expected. It was the same situation when quad was nascent...there was a learning curve, and I expect the same with Atmos.
Why is everyone so jazzed about ATMOS?
- Thread starter Bob Romano
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
Watch the first minute or so and you can tell how this is going to end
Every upgrade of more and more speakers is going to give marginal improvement to any audio system. It's not going to be like the quantum leap that stereo was over mono.
Last edited:
This might come across as a bit snooty, but the buddy's Atmos system which Steve Guttenberg appears to have used as his reference was far from a best practice example!
I'm just gonna say this: I think the biggest reason we get bad mixes is the perpetuation that Dolby Atmos is designed for headphones and is just an extension of stereo. All the info on the net just doesn't help for any new mixer.
The only reason I didn't fall into this trap is because my brain went, "well what's the point of having these speakers if you aren't gonna use it?"
The only reason I didn't fall into this trap is because my brain went, "well what's the point of having these speakers if you aren't gonna use it?"
Tornado Red
1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Yeah, I thought he got the headphone thing right. That's about all I hear too, wide stereo. And he might have been better served doing some Atmos on BD-A instead of streaming services, as he seemed to miss the hi res that he gets with stereo.
All I can say is that I selected parents based on longevity, among other factors. Both are deep in their 90s with no end in sight. Mom keeps hurting herself gardening, but strangely, she heals and goes back to work.
Of course, they are now somewhat dependent on me, which delays my own projects (I have so many projects in my house that I refer to it as “The Projects”). I expect to have the second rack in place this week, which probably means it will be next month.
Steve Guttenberg shows some "atmos enabled" speakers on the pictures. And some streaming Atmos mixes. This is not a way to "demo" or to understand the potential for good mixes.
If he had tried, say, Yello -Point, from Blu-ray in a 7.1.4 (at least) good discrete speakers installation, he would have spoken differently, I suppose. Unless he wants to keep elevating the stereo above everything else.
BUT.... we have also to understand that very very very very few of us have, at least, good 7.1.4 discrete speakers (not reflecting "enabled Atmos").
We have to thank that there are some mixers that mix Atmos for us to enjoy on our 7.1.4 systems. 9.1.4 in my case, and I really enjoy when Atmos objects are at about 70º and my Wides are firing to get a brilliant wide sound stage. Say this to the people or mixers that use headphones...
Sigh. Once again I find Guttenbergs testing methods questionable. He didn't get quad, poo poo'd it off the start, never was a surround music fan, uses crappy upmix methods incorporated into older AVR's as examples and is just generally full of shit.
Except on one point.
I find his arguments about imaging and listener's ability to discern differences in mixes fairly credible. Many listeners -present company excluded of course- never sit down and really listen to the music. I myself have fallen into that listening mode myself at times, thinking well crap another crappy mix. But when later relaxed listens with my mind not whirling about life's insistent hammering at my skull, to find those same mixes to be quite better than I initially thought.
One I suppose, could argue that one should not have to be in a "listening mode" to fully appreciate all aspects of imaging and presentation of the sound field, it should just be obvious. If said, I would dismiss that as a fallacy right off. How many mixes have you listened to, that over time you realize are much more than you initially thought, including of course stereo?
It's all subjective, of course, and he can argue for whatever he wants with all the descriptive words he wants to throw at surround in general or Atmos in particular.
However I take umbrage at the (implied) belittling of Atmos encoded music/fans, passing it all off as if we're a bunch of neophytes jumping to the "next best thing". He can kiss my old, uh, Atmos system.
Note: I made it about half way through the video, was all I could stand. So shoot me.
Except on one point.
I find his arguments about imaging and listener's ability to discern differences in mixes fairly credible. Many listeners -present company excluded of course- never sit down and really listen to the music. I myself have fallen into that listening mode myself at times, thinking well crap another crappy mix. But when later relaxed listens with my mind not whirling about life's insistent hammering at my skull, to find those same mixes to be quite better than I initially thought.
One I suppose, could argue that one should not have to be in a "listening mode" to fully appreciate all aspects of imaging and presentation of the sound field, it should just be obvious. If said, I would dismiss that as a fallacy right off. How many mixes have you listened to, that over time you realize are much more than you initially thought, including of course stereo?
It's all subjective, of course, and he can argue for whatever he wants with all the descriptive words he wants to throw at surround in general or Atmos in particular.
However I take umbrage at the (implied) belittling of Atmos encoded music/fans, passing it all off as if we're a bunch of neophytes jumping to the "next best thing". He can kiss my old, uh, Atmos system.
Note: I made it about half way through the video, was all I could stand. So shoot me.
Oh my, who could ever have imagined that Atmos would require a different mix? 
A setup job by Steve in which he did one hell of a job slamming Atmos while at the same time sounding like he was praising it. Or was it vise versa? Did we expect anything different.
He's still a Stereo guy, BIG SURPRISE.
A setup job by Steve in which he did one hell of a job slamming Atmos while at the same time sounding like he was praising it. Or was it vise versa? Did we expect anything different.
He's still a Stereo guy, BIG SURPRISE.
BANG LOL
Last edited:
Got me!Oh my, who could ever have imagined that Atmos would require a different mix?
A setup job by Steve in which he did one hell of a job slamming Atmos while at the same time sounding like he was praising it. Or was it vise versa? Did we expect anything different.
He's still a Stereo guy, BIG SURPRISE.
BANG LOL
He's just another old dude stuck in the 70's. I can hear refrains of 'if it was good enough for Pop it's good enough for me". lol.
Truth is, as we all know, a lot of people just don't get surround/immersive music. Just the way it is, and I'm cool with that. But if you don't understand it then just STFU and quit wasting everyone's time explaining what you don't understand.
Sonnyblu62
Member
I love it! All surround sound... Because as a musician, many times you can hear all the parts/instruments in their completion, without being covered up in a stereo mix. However, It also give you greater appreciation for some of the great stereo mixes.
I switch between ATMOS 5.1.2 with front height and 7.1 ear level. So glad I found this forum. Thank you for being here!
I switch between ATMOS 5.1.2 with front height and 7.1 ear level. So glad I found this forum. Thank you for being here!
Oh so true! But all people like Steve get YouTube hits by being controversial…not just with audio…and that’s what they seek. Hey, we all like to hear ourselves talk once in a while. Just like me with this post…
Seriously, we like to bash sound bars on this forum. But if that’s all someone can afford, all the spouse will allow (key), or all they want to be bothered with, then fine. Enjoy what they have. (Did I say that sometimes I like hearing myself talk?
)
Welcome Sonny! Let’s hear more from you.
Credit goes to Jon Urban, who started this forum in the early 2000's. I hardly think he ever had a clue the forum would grow as huge as it has. But I credit him, intentional or happy accident for the great forum we have today full of mostly like minded folks about music. Jon has retired from the forum and it is now being administered by different folks, but most of the moderators have been here a long time.
And....welcome to the forum! Glad to have you here.
.
Amen and thank you once more @JonUrban , you the MAN!
What's really bad is that I've been a multich guy for near 50 years and just found this place less than 2 years ago.
Guess I had my head deep up my butt.
You would think Steve Gutenberg would have access to better Atmos Speakers / Atmos system than the upfiring Atmos speakers in his video. Not trying to offend anyone with upfiring Atmos speakers but In-ceiling /ceiling mounted speakers give you much more discrete sounds from height atmos speakers. It seems like Steve also is streaming atmos which isn’t in the same league IMO as Blu ray discs for Atmos surround mixes. What really surprises me is his take on 5.1 surround with DVD audio /SACD surround mixes being around for many years and saying he didn’t hear much difference. Make you wonder if he really has heard a good quality, well setup 5.1 surround system with either Bluray, DVD audio or SACD surround mixes. If he is an audiophile and can’t tell much difference between surround mixes from Elliot Scheiner, Steven Wilson,etc from his high end stereo system???
I have in another room a separate stereo all McIntosh Amp, Preamp with Magnepan Speakers and jl audio subwoofer so I know what good stereo imaging is like.
A good quality 5.1/ Dolby Atmos system is easy to hear the difference from stereo IMHO.
Then Steve starts talking about Atmos soundbars??? Maybe he should stick to stereo reviews.
I have in another room a separate stereo all McIntosh Amp, Preamp with Magnepan Speakers and jl audio subwoofer so I know what good stereo imaging is like.
A good quality 5.1/ Dolby Atmos system is easy to hear the difference from stereo IMHO.
Then Steve starts talking about Atmos soundbars??? Maybe he should stick to stereo reviews.
Belgiumliver
Member
I am jazzed to set up a 7.2.4 system soon! Thanks for the info.
Welcome to the forum
Up until a few days ago, I would have said that Steve's claim of not hearing much difference between stereo and 5.1 surround is nonsense. However, I recently did an experiment with my wife. I played the stereo version of a song (in stereo) and then a 5.1 version of the same song. She claimed not to hear any difference. I said, "What do you mean? Don't you hear vocals coming from the rear?" She replied, "Oh, I hear the guys' voices coming from the back, but it all still sounds all the same to me." I was flabbergasted.
In her defense, I will admit that my AR9 loudspeakers present a huge stereo sound stage; and I've found myself at times being fooled into thinking that pure 2-channel was actually one of the upmixing codecs doing its thing in faked surround. But it does show that perhaps some people respond only to the music and the fidelity rather than how it is presented in the sound space.
Similar threads
