Here is Stupid Idea #5986.
With all this discussion about the Grammy Awards and the Immersive category, and how relevant it is or is not, I wonder why we don't formulate an award on this forum for what WE consider to be the best mix of a given year? If we were to do this, here is what I would propose:
Categories: I propose two or three categories:
Immersive Audio: Music which employs more than 7.x discrete channels of information
Modern Multichannel: Music which employs 5.1 or 7.1 channels
Legacy Quad: Music which is mixed in 4.0 or 4.1 including new or old music which saw a fresh release in the year in question.
Note that some people listen to a native Immersive mix in the Modern Multichannel mode, aka 5.1 or 7.1. The category in which one should place a nominee is the category in which the music is consumed. So if you listen to an Atmos mix in 5.1*, your nomination should be in the Modern Multichannel category.
*On a tangent, some people call listening to an Atmos mix in 5.1 "downmixed," but this does not seem to me to be accurate, and others have mentioned this. Can we come up with (or does there exist) a modern term to describe listening to an Immersive mix when one does not utilize Metadata to send content to additional speakers? How about "root mix" or "base mix" or some other term? It would be cool if we could agree on a term and apply it consistently.
Back to the QQwammys:
Eligibility: Titles in each category may be eligible for nomination if they were RELEASED in the year in question. When were we able to listen to this for the 1st time? For 2023 we would use 2023 SURROUND RELEASES as a guideline. If something has been missed, anyone could advocate to be included in the referenced thread for inclusion. As for Quadios and Dutton Vocalion, in most cases the modern release is the first chance consumers have had to hear the original master mix in a pristine presentation. So again, date released in the modern format determines eligibility.
Two Phases: Nomination and Final Voting
Nomination: Any and all QQ members would be given a window of time (1 month, 2 months?) to nominate three surround titles per category. In fact, I propose that people can even join QQ during the nomination phase and be eligible to vote. Each member can nominate up to three separate titles for consideration. Ideally these nominations would be based on the excellence of the mix above all, but with many people voting I don't think any biases on the part of a single member would come through. For instance, you could not nominate the same title three times. It should be noted also that nominations should be made only for music you have actually listened to in surround.
Final Voting: Once nominations are compiled* (see cop-out #1) then the top 10 nominees would be listed in a simple QQ poll. Final voting would commence, with each member picking only one mix as their top mix of the year. Ideally no results would be shown until the voting closes and the results are tallied. It would then be simple to display the top 10 mixes in the order of most admired mix to least. In all likelihood all 10 mixes would be excellent.
These results would of course be posted on QQ, but could also be posted on other forums for others to view, and it might help to generate interest in our corner of the internet. We could also, if we so chose, prepare certificates to send to the winners in appreciation of the work they have done that has inspired us.
Cop-out #1: I had this idea in the shower. I am a great idea guy, but far too busy to be able to compile nominations or oversee this process. So if it is to be a thing, perhaps we first need volunteers to step forward and pledge to manage the incoming information (mostly for the nominee process). Sorry I cannot offer more involvement. But I would vote!
In summary, we are the most dedicated consumers of multichannel content. Why wouldn't we formalize a process of recognition? The polls are good, but so many discs get "a ten" that it is hard to quantify what is really good, better, best. By forcing a vote on a single best mix of the year we might get (or give) a better picture of what we value most here. If we like the results for our most recent year, 2023, we could always go back by release date and do other years in the same manner. Could be fun and instructive!
What say you?
With all this discussion about the Grammy Awards and the Immersive category, and how relevant it is or is not, I wonder why we don't formulate an award on this forum for what WE consider to be the best mix of a given year? If we were to do this, here is what I would propose:
Categories: I propose two or three categories:
Immersive Audio: Music which employs more than 7.x discrete channels of information
Modern Multichannel: Music which employs 5.1 or 7.1 channels
Legacy Quad: Music which is mixed in 4.0 or 4.1 including new or old music which saw a fresh release in the year in question.
Note that some people listen to a native Immersive mix in the Modern Multichannel mode, aka 5.1 or 7.1. The category in which one should place a nominee is the category in which the music is consumed. So if you listen to an Atmos mix in 5.1*, your nomination should be in the Modern Multichannel category.
*On a tangent, some people call listening to an Atmos mix in 5.1 "downmixed," but this does not seem to me to be accurate, and others have mentioned this. Can we come up with (or does there exist) a modern term to describe listening to an Immersive mix when one does not utilize Metadata to send content to additional speakers? How about "root mix" or "base mix" or some other term? It would be cool if we could agree on a term and apply it consistently.
Back to the QQwammys:
Eligibility: Titles in each category may be eligible for nomination if they were RELEASED in the year in question. When were we able to listen to this for the 1st time? For 2023 we would use 2023 SURROUND RELEASES as a guideline. If something has been missed, anyone could advocate to be included in the referenced thread for inclusion. As for Quadios and Dutton Vocalion, in most cases the modern release is the first chance consumers have had to hear the original master mix in a pristine presentation. So again, date released in the modern format determines eligibility.
Two Phases: Nomination and Final Voting
Nomination: Any and all QQ members would be given a window of time (1 month, 2 months?) to nominate three surround titles per category. In fact, I propose that people can even join QQ during the nomination phase and be eligible to vote. Each member can nominate up to three separate titles for consideration. Ideally these nominations would be based on the excellence of the mix above all, but with many people voting I don't think any biases on the part of a single member would come through. For instance, you could not nominate the same title three times. It should be noted also that nominations should be made only for music you have actually listened to in surround.
Final Voting: Once nominations are compiled* (see cop-out #1) then the top 10 nominees would be listed in a simple QQ poll. Final voting would commence, with each member picking only one mix as their top mix of the year. Ideally no results would be shown until the voting closes and the results are tallied. It would then be simple to display the top 10 mixes in the order of most admired mix to least. In all likelihood all 10 mixes would be excellent.
These results would of course be posted on QQ, but could also be posted on other forums for others to view, and it might help to generate interest in our corner of the internet. We could also, if we so chose, prepare certificates to send to the winners in appreciation of the work they have done that has inspired us.
Cop-out #1: I had this idea in the shower. I am a great idea guy, but far too busy to be able to compile nominations or oversee this process. So if it is to be a thing, perhaps we first need volunteers to step forward and pledge to manage the incoming information (mostly for the nominee process). Sorry I cannot offer more involvement. But I would vote!
In summary, we are the most dedicated consumers of multichannel content. Why wouldn't we formalize a process of recognition? The polls are good, but so many discs get "a ten" that it is hard to quantify what is really good, better, best. By forcing a vote on a single best mix of the year we might get (or give) a better picture of what we value most here. If we like the results for our most recent year, 2023, we could always go back by release date and do other years in the same manner. Could be fun and instructive!
What say you?
