Atmos Music Downloads in High Resolution (Record Club/Audible model)?

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
4,672
Location
Melbourne, Australia
With all the new Atmos streaming titles in lossy audio is it now time to release them in a high resolution file download format for the audiophiles to own?

A $20 or $25 payment to own a high res copy of an album would put more money in the music labels coffers than the pennies they get from a song play royalty from the streaming services.

I’ve been wondering whether the old ‘Record Club’ model from the sixties and seventies or an ‘Audible‘ type model where users pay a monthly fee to buy any title via a subscription/membership fee would be successful. The Audible model is 12 or 24 books for a 12 month membership fee, users can buy any 12 or 24 books at any time over 12 months and buy an additional book for an additional fee.

Thoughts?
 

LennonCobain

800 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
842
Location
New England
I would like to see something like this happen. However, I am skeptical. There are very few high resolution multichannel albums available for purchase through channels such as HDtracks and the basic premise of traditional 5.1 FLAC vs Atmos files is the same. In addition, the current trend of Atmos mixes remaining streaming only (e.g. Tattoo You) even when a simultaneous physical super deluxe release was made available for purchase is a strong indication that the music industry is more committed than ever to relegate multichannel music to a subscription model.
 

dabl

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Sep 1, 2003
Messages
412
immersiveaudioalbum.com offer at least 1 lossless Atmos album so they started something along these lines, they just need to do more.

My guess is the problem is getting the labels to recognize this could be a good idea.
 

marpow

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
5,466
Location
San Mateo CA
immersiveaudioalbum.com offer at least 1 lossless Atmos album so they started something along these lines, they just need to do more.

My guess is the problem is getting the labels to recognize this could be a good idea.
Have you purchased that album at the very least as an experiment in sound?

As far as a buying club with quality 5.1 or Atmos sound, I could see myself doing that.
 

woody

300 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
353
Location
Melbourne, Australia
I have thought the same about a similar model HomerJAU.

I reckon it will happen.

The demand is there, and the distribution method is much cheaper I would imagine than physical distribution so it makes complete sense.

FWIW I thought the Yello- Point approach was a smart one. Entice the listener on streaming to buy, then with the physical release add a couple of extra surround tracks for the investment. I thought that was a smart approach to appease all.
 

Cheezmo

800 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Jun 5, 2011
Messages
851
Location
Texas
Demand is not there. How many people have home theater setups where they could play a downloaded Dolby Atmos track. A few geeks like us, in no way a main stream market.
 

jimfisheye

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
2,459
My first thought is I need to check to see if there's still that single option for a media player app and if it's still $400. Didn't feel like paying that much a couple weeks ago. For a media player app. Didn't see it on... that one place either yet. (Yes I looked! That's what happens when you gouge.)

I buy downloadable music. I might even prefer it! I'd be in. I never have and never will buy lossy. That's radio-like promo meant as a calling card. Shouldn't be scamming people selling in that form! Similar zero interest in lossy streaming. Especially this extra stepped on multichannel they're flailing about with!
 

PK

800 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
835
Location
Los Angeles
I thought the vast majority of members here were all about Hi Res audio...the enthusiasm for lossy atmos has surprised me🤷‍♂️...has me wondering if it's due to the Atmos listening experience or is it due to the release of more content in a surround format, regardless of it being lossy...I do see some discussion about Blu Ray Atmos vs streaming atmos, but not as much as I would have thought...Anyway that said, I'm not set up for atmos yet, but would purchase lossless atmos downloads for sure.
 

jamesc

Well-known Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2015
Messages
104
Location
US
I'd jump on board in a heartbeat if they had a catalog like you can find on the streaming services. There's no reason why there shouldn't be since the hard work is already done. I get the labels' aversion to physical discs with all the issues they and we have had with them. A lot of us just end up ripping the discs and putting the music on our servers anyway so they'd be saving us a step!
The move to most new surround titles only being available on lossy streaming has been frustrating. It's especially frustrating when the beginnings of songs are chopped off or you get gaps between songs when they should be seamless. Those interfaces need work as well. What year is this again? And if they do succeed in making me a streaming only customer, they'll end up losing a lot of money since I spend way more than $10-20 a month on music. I suspect most forum members are in the same boat.
 

boondocks

Senior Surround Collector
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
2,473
Location
State of Being
I would hazard a guess that even though lossy, there may be surround music we feel we won't get otherwise. Problem is we just don't know what's down the pike. So why wait for a product that may never come?

I have many Jazz/blues concert DVD's and a few BD's that only have....DD! Do I want to have at least DTS? ...of course. LPCM stereo instead of DD? Hell yes.
Is it going to stop me listening to music only offered that way? Nope. It's sad that some major artists have released (or their labels perhaps) so much music in AC3/DD. Find me a B.O.C blu ray that has better than DD....please!

Anyone that has ever tried to understand the debacle with surround releases and any reasonable actions by the recording industry comes up with...nada.
Argue all you want for holdouts from the industry "because the money just ain't there" is tainted with the same old BS since Quad days. Packaging and distributing lossless flac can surely not tax the minds of industry execs that far? Oh...wait...

Having said all that, I don't put the whole load on the artists...I mean a guy or gal has to earn a living. But I still know we're getting crapped on, regardless of who's to blame.
 

barfle

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
210
Location
Meridian, ID
I thought the vast majority of members here were all about Hi Res audio...the enthusiasm for lossy atmos has surprised me🤷‍♂️...
Not speaking for anyone else, but the original quad formats were putting ten pounds of stuff (four channels of audio) into a five-pound bag (stereo record groove), so losses were inevitable. Depending on the system being used, losses were at least bandwidth or phase coherency. So I’m used to lossy formats, and have been for about fifty years.
 

barfle

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2005
Messages
210
Location
Meridian, ID
With all the new Atmos streaming titles in lossy audio is it now time to release them in a high resolution file download format for the audiophiles to own?

A $20 or $25 payment to own a high res copy of an album would put more money in the music labels coffers than the pennies they get from a song play royalty from the streaming services.

I’ve been wondering whether the old ‘Record Club’ model from the sixties and seventies or an ‘Audible‘ type model where users pay a monthly fee to buy any title via a subscription/membership fee would be successful. The Audible model is 12 or 24 books for a 12 month membership fee, users can buy any 12 or 24 books at any time over 12 months and buy an additional book for an additional fee.

Thoughts?
Not sure if I’d be willing to subscribe to a service like that. I was in Musical Heritage Society foor a year, and as I recall, I had a dozen albums of composers I had never heard of, and played the record once. Of course, being too lazy to send them back didn’t help.
 

zeerround

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
659
The problem is “people consume their music via streaming these days” “they don’t buy ‘discs’ (which could be lossless)”.

So commercial immersive releases are much more likely to be lossy streaming. I guess the good news is that the actual master is lossless, with the streaming companies deciding how to deliver it (at what quality), so if the artist/music company did decide to release a Blu-ray it could be lossless.

fyi I did an immersive up-remix of thick as a brick and made both Tidal quality lossy atmos and DTS:X lossless versions. I guess before making broad statements I’d want more people to do ABX type listening tests but I would say that for “casual listening” the lossy atmos is quite nice.

I could do a lossless atmos version for comparison, it’s just that encoding with the full on atmos encoding suite is a much bigger PITA vs. drag and drop the monos into the DTS:X encoder or uploading them for atmos lossy encoding in AWS.
 

boondocks

Senior Surround Collector
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
2,473
Location
State of Being
I agree, but times change, and for the surround sound listener we're pretty much at the mercy of corporations to decide what we get lossless. I freely confess that I don't subscribe to any streaming service, save my original Spotify free account since they first opened their doors for business....but I've managed to yet hear plenty of the streaming DD/Atmos and for the reasons I stated above I will keep listening as opportunity presents. Lord knows I have plenty of lossy surround, some of it quite good though to my old ears, but then I've had some of it quite a while now.

Still, I will keep acquiring BD's as I can afford, and yes, still keep buying those DVD's with DTS when there is no other option to hear the music I like. Last year we were able to convince Giancarlo Erra to turn out an album on DVDA...just wish more artists would have the same concern for their buying public as he does.
 

oleintagout

Member
Joined
May 6, 2022
Messages
44
Location
Manchester UK
I agree, but times change, and for the surround sound listener we're pretty much at the mercy of corporations to decide what we get lossless. I freely confess that I don't subscribe to any streaming service, save my original Spotify free account since they first opened their doors for business....but I've managed to yet hear plenty of the streaming DD/Atmos and for the reasons I stated above I will keep listening as opportunity presents. Lord knows I have plenty of lossy surround, some of it quite good though to my old ears, but then I've had some of it quite a while now.

Still, I will keep acquiring BD's as I can afford, and yes, still keep buying those DVD's with DTS when there is no other option to hear the music I like. Last year we were able to convince Giancarlo Erra to turn out an album on DVDA...just wish more artists would have the same concern for their buying public as he does.
Artists should own their own stuff and not deal with large corporations. Prince told us this in the 90's. Bypass the devils.
 

zeerround

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
659
Top