Listening to in Dolby Atmos Streaming, via Tidal/Apple

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

humprof

Junior Senior
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Messages
4,103
Location
NoCal
You may be right, I'd need to revisit all the figuring. I have a pet peeve about any expression in 'bits per second' with these (relatively) large file and bandwidth numbers, I just find bytes easier to get my mind around. There is some argument that when talking about bandwidth vs file sizes that 'bits' make more sense but I can't remember how it goes and also suspect it's rooted in some reasons from the past that may not make sense anymore.
FWIW: @AYanguas corrected @dabl's bit/Byte slip just a couple of posts later in the original thread.

I want to say that someone--@bracelis, maybe (who hasn't logged in for a year), or @pat bateman?--once posted a very thorough and cogent explanation of the bandwidth issue and its potential implications for fidelity and resolution. My takeaway from it--possibly wrong--was that the streaming services are indeed scrimping on bandwidth when it comes to Atmos, presumably on a theory that's analogous to what we know about mp3. That is: much of the time, for many kinds of music, 768kbps is actually plenty of bandwidth, even for 7.1.4 channels. It's relatively rare that the density of musical information in any given channel (or combination of channels) will require more than a total of 768kbps to transmit the signal with the requisite clarity, dynamics, and frequency response. But when it does require more than 768k, then of course those channels carrying the more complex parts of the signal will get compressed, and that's when you lose fidelity. I reckon Apple and Tidal and Amazon figure, cynically, that since most people listening to Atmos on their services are using headphones or soundbars or Echo speakers, it doesn't matter. But I still find it hard to believe that scrimping in that way really amounts to a significant savings on their end. Still hoping that record companies have been delivering their files in high-res all along and Apple will start streaming them that way with a new OS.
 
Last edited:

CPR

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
457
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Just listened to The Doors, Waiting For The Sun, whole album. Wow, definitely heard things I never heard before, including things I didn't hear on my 5.1 SACD.
Only small negative is there are a few moments where Jim's vocals go soft but seem to come back.
try listening to the DVD/A, Perception disc
Blows away the Atmos version, IMHO
 

cdheer

Well-known Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2022
Messages
133
Location
Gurnee, IL
You may be right, I'd need to revisit all the figuring. I have a pet peeve about any expression in 'bits per second' with these (relatively) large file and bandwidth numbers, I just find bytes easier to get my mind around. There is some argument that when talking about bandwidth vs file sizes that 'bits' make more sense but I can't remember how it goes and also suspect it's rooted in some reasons from the past that may not make sense anymore.
In the networking business, everything is bits/second. I presume this is because data is still sent sequentially.
 

himey

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
2,163
try listening to the DVD/A, Perception disc
Blows away the Atmos version, IMHO
For the DVDA to "blow away" the Atmos mix, that would mean the Atmos mix would have to be pretty poor, which certainly isn't the case. I personally think they both sound great on my system. It's a shame that the Atmos mix doesn't sound good on your setup. Most people here think it sounds great like the person you originally quoted.
 

himey

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Nov 11, 2013
Messages
2,163
Hello everyone, seems like a great community here, happy to join.
Im a mix engineer who is just starting getting into atmos mixing. In my studio i have a 9.2.4 setup and am able to stream via 4K Apple TV into a tonewinner At300 receiver going into Avid Matrix router to my speakers. When listening to ADM files straight from the dolby renderer, all mixes sound pristine in all channels, however ive noticed when streaming from Apple and Tidal when I solo certain surround channels I get a sort of garbled digital artifacty sound. Similar to how a low res mp3 sounds. I notice it the most in the heights but its sometimes bad in the surrounds for certain songs. usually the L, R and C channels sound clean. Ive tried using the amazon fire cube as well and different HDMI cables and have the exact same result. My internet connection is very strong. I have an ADM file of a mix that is also on streaming so I was able to directly compare and the difference is a pretty dramatic loss in quality. Im wondering if anyone else has noticed this or has any ideas of what is causing it? I have heard that this could be related to the Dolby Digital plus JOC encoding that happens when these files are streaming.
I would suggest listening from the sweet spot with all channels properly calibrated. Even lossless mixes won't sound right if you ignore the majority of the channels. There are exceptions, like isolating the center channel of America's Homecoming album, just the center sounds very cohesive, but that usually isn't the case.
 

AYanguas

400 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
473
Location
Spain
In the networking business, everything is bits/second. I presume this is because data is still sent sequentially.
If the nomenclature for units is used correctly, there should be no doubt. Bit symbol is lowercase 'b' and Byte symbol is uppercase 'B'. Also, in the networking business k = 1000 and in the Storage/Memory business the not always properly named 'Binary K Unit" = 1024.

With the results in mind, 8 or lets say 10 Mbps should be the needed Internet bandwith to stream Hi-res Dolby TrueHD with Atmos.

I am clear that it should not be any technical impediment, but a marketing strategy.
 

HomerJAU

Moderator: MCH Media Players
Staff member
Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jun 13, 2013
Messages
4,661
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Technically it’s easier to stream lossless 24/48 multichannel audio (including Atmos) than stream 4K and HD video (aka Netflix etc).

Current low bitrate audio streaming is used because it’s historical and cheaper (low bandwidth) and it’s flogged by Dolby that DD is all that’s needed since most users can’t tell the difference between lossy and lossless (and they use crappy audio systems/headphones). Let’s face it, MP3 audio has been the ‘reference’ quality audio for most users for last couple of decades.

There is a need/market for lossless audio streaming for surround audiophiles and ‘neo-audiophiles’. Most of us here would pay a premium of lossless multichannel streaming or to buy lossless versions (via disc or download). But this is a very small market compared to stereophiles. So the reality is we will probably never see/hear lossless music streaming.
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2015
Messages
17
I am new to Dolby Atmos streaming. I am testing both Tidal and Apple. There are differences in available material which makes a full comparison tough. At first I thought Apple sounded a bit better, but today is a Tidal day and it sounds pretty good.

The user interface for finding Atmos seems wonky for both units.

Also, it seems that there are weird omissions. For example, I can't locate White Album in Atmos. Everything else can be located by the Beatles in Atmos if it is out in Atmos.
 

marpow

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 9, 2015
Messages
5,461
Location
San Mateo CA
Technically it’s easier to stream lossless 24/48 multichannel audio (including Atmos) than stream 4K and HD video (aka Netflix etc).

Current low bitrate audio streaming is used because it’s historical and cheaper (low bandwidth) and it’s flogged by Dolby that DD is all that’s needed since most users can’t tell the difference between lossy and lossless (and they use crappy audio systems/headphones). Let’s face it, MP3 audio has been the ‘reference’ quality audio for most users for last couple of decades.

There is a need/market for lossless audio streaming for surround audiophiles and ‘neo-audiophiles’. Most of us here would pay a premium of lossless multichannel streaming or to buy lossless versions (via disc or download). But this is a very small market compared to stereophiles. So the reality is we will probably never see/hear lossless music streaming.
I am glad you mentioned Netflix, I seem to get popping/cracking sound in my speakers only with Netflix shows that are Dolby Atmos, most of the time somewhat annoying, but when I was watching the series F1: Drive To Survive, it was really bad, maybe because more LFE, roar of engines, etc. Could be my Dynamic Range setting on my Pre/Pro didn't like it?
 

marcb

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
639
Technically it’s easier to stream lossless 24/48 multichannel audio (including Atmos) than stream 4K and HD video (aka Netflix etc).

Current low bitrate audio streaming is used because it’s historical and cheaper (low bandwidth) and it’s flogged by Dolby that DD is all that’s needed since most users can’t tell the difference between lossy and lossless (and they use crappy audio systems/headphones). Let’s face it, MP3 audio has been the ‘reference’ quality audio for most users for last couple of decades.

There is a need/market for lossless audio streaming for surround audiophiles and ‘neo-audiophiles’. Most of us here would pay a premium of lossless multichannel streaming or to buy lossless versions (via disc or download). But this is a very small market compared to stereophiles. So the reality is we will probably never see/hear lossless music streaming.
Lossless music streaming already exists. Do you mean lossless multichannel streaming?
 

marcb

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Nov 15, 2010
Messages
639
He specifically mentions multichannel and surround.

Are you OK?
You could have just said "although I'm not him, I'll speak for him and say, yes, I think he meant multi-channel steaming".
 
Top