"New" artists and surround

[MidiMagic]

"Anything we make must be compatible with the LP, stereo FM, car stereo, and headphones.."

Every mix I make is mono/stereo/QS compatible.

 

[Methuselah’s Grandpa]

As for mixing in multi channel, and I am not new (nor known), I have considered doing it often, but it is expensive to have a suited monitoring set up in a home studio, and then to consider on what format to release, without paying too much for proprietary format/codecs. Releasing a CD is easy. Releasing anything multichannel is less so.

Have you considered bypassing the proprietary codecs & the extra complexities & expense of the more immersive formats and simply release a 5.1 or 7.1 album in PCM or FLAC on BandCamp or something similar?

 

[Malhomme]

Have you considered bypassing the proprietary codecs & the extra complexities & expense of the more immersive formats and simply release a 5.1 or 7.1 album in PCM or FLAC on BandCamp or something similar?

I have. But I also I have yet to set up that monitoring system, which obviously comes first and isn't cheap to start with.

 

[The Bright Side]

I've always wondered. Why don't you think new artists mix their material for surround and release it?

I guess Taylor Swift doesn't "need" it, but wouldn't it expand their marketing and influence?

Lizzo, Charlie Puth, Miley Cyrus, The Weeknd, Luke Combs, Drake, Ed Sheeran, Post Malone, Harry Styles, David Guetta (who is actually a producer!), Morgan Wallen (who has the #1 song on both the pop and country charts this week), ....the list is nearly endless.

Or when ABBA released their first album in 20 years, why not do it in surround, too, to create more buzz? Everything But the Girl did it right with Fuse. They had zero surround in the past and released Fuse in Atmos.

When they re-released Thriller in a high quality version, would it have killed them to also do it in surround for more sales?

Is it that much more expensive to produce something in surround? Does it cost rights money to encode in Atmos, Dolby or some other system?

Inquiring minds......

I'll admit I don't fully understand this thread. As Adam said, all (or most?) of the artists you mentioned have albums or entire discographies out in Surround. I actually got deeper into Taylor Swift's catalogue specifically because of the surround, and not only did I discover a fun, creative and massively talented artists and songwriter, but also some fantastic mixing and mastering that suits and enhances the music.

At this point, it's pretty much unusual for any major or even minor new album to not be released in Atmos.

If what you're actually asking is why these mixes don't come out on disc, I think that's sad but I'd say it's just the world we live in now. People have moved on to streaming. There's still ways to save the music for posterity if you've got the means and time. So I'll admit, after 34 years collecting discs and having amassed well over 1100 physical titles, I can live surprisingly well with the unavailability of my preferred mixes on physical media. The sheerly incredible magnitude of choice compensates for that very well. Just my couple cents.

 

[kfbkfb]

Maybe a variation of the Hafler/DynaQuad method to provide some surround sound (basically 1 channel) in stereo content - 120 degrees out of phase between L & R rather than 180 degrees, then the surround content wouldn't completely cancel out in mono.

Mixing studios could set up a simple speaker matrix decoder (no logic of course) to monitor the surround content, perhaps mixing software could have an add on to place sounds 120 degrees out of phase between L & R.


Kirk Bayne

 

[esimms86]

I understand why record companies wouldn't spend the finances on "new" artists, but many that I mentioned are far from new. They are huge hitmakers.

I understand that most listening us streaming, but that doesn't seem to stop them pressing vinyl records and CDs. Just look in any Walmart today. That section keeps getting bigger and bigger.

I also read an article that said 50% of people who buy vinyl don't have a way to play records. Dunno.

And 50% of people who buy pianos do not play the piano. Some people just like the idea of having a “piano shaped object” in their homes.

 

[gvl_guy]

I'll admit I don't fully understand this thread. As Adam said, all (or most?) of the artists you mentioned have albums or entire discographies out in Surround. I actually got deeper into Taylor Swift's catalogue specifically because of the surround, and not only did I discover a fun, creative and massively talented artists and songwriter, but also some fantastic mixing and mastering that suits and enhances the music.

At this point, it's pretty much unusual for any major or even minor new album to not be released in Atmos.

If what you're actually asking is why these mixes don't come out on disc, I think that's sad but I'd say it's just the world we live in now. People have moved on to streaming. There's still ways to save the music for posterity if you've got the means and time. So I'll admit, after 34 years collecting discs and having amassed well over 1100 physical titles, I can live surprisingly well with the unavailability of my preferred mixes on physical media. The sheerly incredible magnitude of choice compensates for that very well. Just my couple cents.

Bingo. Yes. Physical media.

 

[ClassicalSurroundFan]

Lorde is the only one of those I've ever heard of.

Check out Aurora then if you like smart, melodic music. All My Demons Greeting Me as a Friend, and the Sky soundtrack are in Atmos on Apple.

 

[fredblue]

Bingo. Yes. Physical media.

'twas with a heavy heart i had to begrudgingly accept the Surround physical media ship started sailing a few years ago.. and then Covid came along and sunk that ship in one gigantic streaming Surround Apple & Tidal wave!!

yes, there's some physical disc Surround stalwart survivors still riding the waves (including SDE, Rhino, Dutton Vocalion, of course) but by and large streaming's where it's at now and i can't see the tide turning.

sheesh, that's a lot of nautical metaphors all at once. how naughty!

 

[mandrix]

"Video killed the radio star"

Cell phones, earbuds & bluetooth speakers killed everything else.

Note: I do use earbuds and have a bluetooth speaker in my shop. But I also have a 7.1.4 Atmos setup.... my 48 year old Daughter likely would not have an AVR if I had not gave her one.

 

[MidiMagic]

Another problem is affordability.

Mono and stereo are at least affordable.

Matrix surround is a little less affordable, but within reach.

Now look at how much a good 9.2.4 system will set you back. And remember that we need several different playback and decoding devices because they won't agree on a common system. Esx-pen-sive!

Maybe they all want discrete so all of the channels can be mixed down into a mono feed.

 

[mandrix]

Another problem is affordability.

Mono and stereo are at least affordable.

Matrix surround is a little less affordable, but within reach.

Now look at how much a good 9.2.4 system will set you back. And remember that we need several different playback and decoding devices because they won't agree on a common system. Esx-pen-sive!

Maybe they all want discrete so all of the channels can be mixed down into a mono feed.

Yep. I "wish" my system would do 5.1.6 but it's 7.1.4. I bought an open box AVR last year to save a few hundred $. 1300 vs 1700. ...and that's chump change these days for AVR's.
Mine won't do Auro3D, but at the time I was unsure what formats would survive, so I bought it mainly for the 11.1 Atmos decoding and the pre-outs. I still have to use a second AVR/amp for the side surrounds.

 

[TuliaNonTroppo]

Yep. I "wish" my system would do 5.1.6 but it's 7.1.4. I bought an open box AVR last year to save a few hundred $. 1300 vs 1700. ...and that's chump change these days for AVR's.
Mine won't do Auro3D, but at the time I was unsure what formats would survive, so I bought it mainly for the 11.1 Atmos decoding and the pre-outs. I still have to use a second AVR/amp for the side surrounds.

I wish I could pull off Atmos, and I am sure I am not alone as a consumer. I rent, which prevents me from ceiling speakers, and I won’t buy into the value of upfiring speakers. I think most consumers are watching the “spatial audio” push go by them without being participants. Thankfully my wife doesn’t mind a 5.2 system in the TV room and my 5.0 system in the listening room. If ever can afford to purchase a home—which is unlikely—I will absolutely install an Atmos-capable system in at least one room.

 

[AYanguas]

Another problem is affordability.

Mono and stereo are at least affordable.

Matrix surround is a little less affordable, but within reach.

Now look at how much a good 9.2.4 system will set you back. And remember that we need several different playback and decoding devices because they won't agree on a common system. Esx-pen-sive!

Maybe they all want discrete so all of the channels can be mixed down into a mono feed.

I am fortunately retired with a good pension and received a good severance from my old company when I stopped working.

I have been able now to reform the new house with my new wife, and build a 9.1.4 home theater for the price of a medium-sized car.

But when I was working in my old house, with my small children and previous wife, I had only a "normal" stereo. I didn't even have a 5.1 system with small satellites to watch movies.

I think I'm lucky now, but most people can't afford it. They can't even develop a hobby about it, because there are other more important things for them.


This is how things are now. Perhaps in the future cheap portable systems will be developed to enable discrete immersive surround sound, and even holographic video, but until then, the true Dolby Atmos music enjoyment is reserved for a very niche market.

Perhaps the current binaural virtualization developments are the seeds of those future systems for everybody, since the artistic initiative for immersive surround music will always be alive.

 

[mandrix]

I was a working stiff from age 16 until I retired early due to physical problems. The gift that keeps on giving as you build your life.
Fortunately I built a lot of equity as a home/land owner over the years that has let me do a few things I would not have been able to do in the past.
I too received a healthy severance package as I timed my retirement to coincide with the business closing. Was rough the last year and they looked for any excuse to fire people, plus the Plant Manager (sic) hated my guts because I stood up for myself.
But now when I'm not taking care of my property, house, or wife, I can kick back and listen to music and tell the world to go away.

 

[fizzywiggs41]

That we are small ,niche , and unimportant are negative adjectives that just help to fuel our own demise.

I do not think we are ignored for our take on surround digital disc's. I think the past decade (maybe even longer) has proven this.

We now see so many offers of surround ,music on physical media in comparison to 2009(when it looked like the end) that I for one can be selective on what I would like to purchase.

I absolutely think we are an important consumer for the present market.

 

[jaybird100]

Why not just use an RM-based system, such as QS, or Involve? There are plenty of PL2-capable receivers out there, the systems sound great in stereo, too, and don't lose a lot in mono. The same mix could also be used for a discrete format, such as SACD.

 

[MidiMagic]

Maybe a variation of the Hafler/DynaQuad method to provide some surround sound (basically 1 channel) in stereo content - 120 degrees out of phase between L & R rather than 180 degrees, then the surround content wouldn't completely cancel out in mono.

Mixing studios could set up a simple speaker matrix decoder (no logic of course) to monitor the surround content, perhaps mixing software could have an add on to place sounds 120 degrees out of phase between L & R.


Kirk Bayne

That's kind of the idea behind Matrix H.

 

[MidiMagic]

Why not just use an RM-based system, such as QS, or Involve? There are plenty of PL2-capable receivers out there, the systems sound great in stereo, too, and don't lose a lot in mono. The same mix could also be used for a discrete format, such as SACD.

I want that! I even know a way to add height to the RM encoding.

The same mix probably can not be used for discrete. The mix that is best for encoding is often mediocre in discrete. And we do not really need discrete.

I do not stream. Every time I trusted some kind of music service, they took my favorites off the service to make room for new music.

What is PL2? I used to program in the PL-1 computer language.

 

[barfle]

I am fortunately retired with a good pension and received a good severance from my old company when I stopped working.

I have been able now to reform the new house with my new wife, and build a 9.1.4 home theater for the price of a medium-sized car.

But when I was working in my old house, with my small children and previous wife, I had only a "normal" stereo. I didn't even have a 5.1 system with small satellites to watch movies.

I think I'm lucky now, but most people can't afford it. They can't even develop a hobby about it, because there are other more important things for them.


This is how things are now. Perhaps in the future cheap portable systems will be developed to enable discrete immersive surround sound, and even holographic video, but until then, the true Dolby Atmos music enjoyment is reserved for a very niche market.

Perhaps the current binaural virtualization developments are the seeds of those future systems for everybody, since the artistic initiative for immersive surround music will always be alive.

I’m in a similar setup, thankfully, although there are always budget constraints. The only gear I’ve purchased since my wife and I bought our last house is the four Atmos speakers, which ran about $200 total. Regarding budget, I still can’t decode Atmos or drive the speakers, but there’s still plenty of good stuff to listen to in the meantime.

About the only thing I listen to on earbuds is podcasts. What will happen to the stuff I’ve carefully and lovingly collected over almost 70 years is anybody’s guess, but I don’t have any heirs that might give a rip.