You'd be surprised - there are tons of Atmos mixes with objects positioned in such a way that engage those 'wide' speakers.
Poll: What's your current Atmos speaker layout?
- Thread starter HomerJAU
- Start date
Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,038
Tons? Do you know of specific mixes that use objects for mix elements that would lead to that? Music mixes I mean, not movies.
Anything in the bed tracks is static. You have to use an object for a mix element to have it "vector style" position in the speaker array available. Which everyone already knows.
The height channels must be treated as objects even if you made a static 7.1.4 mix. This is what it looks like everyone is doing. I'd have to run some mixes through the dolby reference player multiple times while selecting different speaker arrays to sluth out if some mix elements were treated as objects. And I'm already behind ripping mixes to wavpack files so that's not happening any time soon if ever. Is anyone talking about such things with their mixes?
One thing I've seen mentioned (and thought about myself too) is treating the rear channels (Ls/Rs in 5.1 and Lrs/Rrs in 7.1) as objects. To avoid the 5.1 (rear) vs 5.1 (side) faux pas that sometimes comes up.
We know people are mixing on 7.1.4 arrays because they told us so. Anyone making 9.1.6 or above though? Anyone making more use of objects with the aim of a large theater with all the channels?
The object use makes more sense for movie soundtracks and seems really tailored to that. Movie soundtracks though... meh.
Off the top of my head, the following mixes engage the wides pretty heavily (@AYanguas can confirm as he also has a 9.1.4 setup):
- Van Morrison - Moondance (the lead vocals are positioned on an object panned between the front & side speakers, so some of that signal spills over to the wides on a 9.1.x setup)
- Grateful Dead - American Beauty
- Joni Mitchell - Court & Spark (rhythm guitars in "Free Man In Paris" are mostly in the wides, so the mixer had to have used objects positioned somewhere between the front & side speakers)
- Harry Styles - Harry's House (the lead vocals are 100% mixed to the wides in this one, it's an interesting effect)
- Bruce Soord - Luminescence
- The Pineapple Thief - Give It Back
- Monkey House - Remember The Audio
I've been in a few rooms with front wides. In my experience, their effectiveness depends on a couple factors. Those being how much space is there between the L/R and first set of surrounds and how wide of a soundstage the L/R project. In a setup where you already have a nice wide soundstage from the L/R and there isn't a huge distance to the surrounds, they just don't add much. Speakers that don't project much in a room with a sizable space between the front and surrounds, do benefit from wides. But as stated above since these channels are created by the processor, it has a lot to do with how effective they are.
Overall I haven't experienced a room where wides gave me a real "wow" moment. I feel like unless you find yourself noticing a hole in your immersion, it may not be worth chasing.
Great list! Also Elton John's mixes engage the front wides. A notable example is Rocket Man.
What software is shown in that sceenshot?
TIA
That may be me. 7.4.6.
Yes, there are many Atmos mixes that use objects at Front Wides location, especially since the streaming releases boom. The benefit of the Wides is dependent on the room layout and the possibilities of speaker placement, the same as the sides/rears for 5.1/7.1
The recommended location for the Wides is exactly at the middle of the azimuth angle between the fronts and the Sides Surround. Assuming the Fronts are at 30º (for the canonical stereo of the equilateral triangle with the MLP), and the Sides are at 90º-100º azimuth, the Wides are to be located at about 60º-65º azimuth. I think @sjcorne confirmed that an object located at 65º is rendered exclusively in the Wides.
In my experience, the Wides (when used) give a more ‘wide’ nice sound stage when they are separated enough in the wide extension with respect to the Fronts. I think the ‘ideal’ placement is when all 9 floor speakers (LCR, Wides, Surrounds and Surround Backs) are located following a circle. (I managed to do it in my room pretty much).
Our reference mixer Steven Wilson is Not very prolific using the Wides. I was disappointed with the ‘In the Court of the Crimson King’ Atmos mix for not using the Wides almost at all. I always thought it might be because his mixing studio is 7.1.4, and he cannot test enough the benefit of the Wides. Anyway, more recent Steven Wilson Atmos mixes increasingly use Wides.
The benefit of the Wides is more noticeable when the mixer locates sound there that is not usual. I mean, not an extension of the Stereo, or an additional musical arrangement, but an important item like the main vocals. One relevant example, already mentioned by @sjcorne, is ‘2022 - Harrys House’ from Harry Styles, with the main vocals just at the Wides and nothing in the Fronts.
I enclose an Excel when I was documenting the use of Wides on Atmos mixes.
I have already stopped doing it, because there are quite a few mixes that use them, and the use of Wides is no longer so exceptional.
DSU upmixer uses them (since last major upgrade) but, of course, nothing compares to a good Atmos mix creatively using Objects locations.
Last edited:
Nice one... And four subs too
Runnig a 7.2.6 system
So that means you have 4 ceiling speakers and two wide speakers (the .6).Right?
Last edited:
So you have wides but no surround backs?
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,038
Interesting, all right.
But can we tell what speaker array this was mixed on from that? Those objects are placed there. The Dolby decoder is placing them into the speaker array it is pointed to for playback. See where I'm going? This doesn't solve for the unknown variable.
But the most interesting thing to me here is that screen shot! I'm not familiar with this screen shot with either the Dolby reference player or the Dolby Atmos renderer apps. Are you playing back a commercial recording and being shown the object elements in the mix? Piping the reference player into the renderer perhaps? Did I miss a renderer feature and need to learn to RTFM better?
But we still don't know what speaker array the mix was listened to on during mixing! This is why we need to see the speaker array a mix was made on noted on the album cover.
Right, so we can push the idea of speaker agnostic to a silly extreme and suggest mixing while monitoring in binaural stereo. (Which is exactly what the folks using Atmos purely for copy protection are doing.) That might be an interesting thought exercise too. An obvious con is that might start to get into the autopilot AI feeling results territory. Some of us want a mix made by someone listening to their work as they do it! Driven by what they are hearing and responding to it. And then hear it on the same system. That sounds weirdly "Dr. Obvious" and WTF to write out and sorry for digressing!
But I'm curious where that screen shot came from!
The Dolby Atmos Renderer.
I think you say something similar to my mention to Steven Wilson mix (using 7.1.4 mixing system) and not placing objects on Wides location, because he cannot notice the improvement.Interesting, all right.
But can we tell what speaker array this was mixed on from that? Those objects are placed there. The Dolby decoder is placing them into the speaker array it is pointed to for playback. See where I'm going? This doesn't solve for the unknown variable.
But the most interesting thing to me here is that screen shot! I'm not familiar with this screen shot with either the Dolby reference player or the Dolby Atmos renderer apps. Are you playing back a commercial recording and being shown the object elements in the mix? Piping the reference player into the renderer perhaps? Did I miss a renderer feature and need to learn to RTFM better?
But we still don't know what speaker array the mix was listened to on during mixing! This is why we need to see the speaker array a mix was made on noted on the album cover.
Right, so we can push the idea of speaker agnostic to a silly extreme and suggest mixing while monitoring in binaural stereo. (Which is exactly what the folks using Atmos purely for copy protection are doing.) That might be an interesting thought exercise too. An obvious con is that might start to get into the autopilot AI feeling results territory. Some of us want a mix made by someone listening to their work as they do it! Driven by what they are hearing and responding to it. And then hear it on the same system. That sounds weirdly "Dr. Obvious" and WTF to write out and sorry for digressing!
But I'm curious where that screen shot came from!
A mixer may know (or has to know) that if he puts an object in a 3D location not exactly in the location of a bed channel/speaker, it will be 'imaged' better or worse depending on the available speakers at the customer rendering. The mixer with a 7.1.4 system cannot 'check' if that Wides object location improves with main vocals or other arrangement, when the customer has Wides speakers. Much worse if he only check with binaural virtualization headphones, as that will be the only customer listening for the much majority of people.
BUT, What I can say, is that there are a number of Atmos mixes that I enjoy more when the Wides are engaged. I don't know if the mixer did 'check' it or just put that object in the '"wide location' just for the people that have those speakers to enjoy. The final result is that I like really some Atmos mixes with Wides, better, than , for example with Auro-3D (not Wides support) for a big active mix like "Mando Diao - Aelita", one of the most discrete active Auro-3D mixes.
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,038
Aha, a RTFM issue then!
What are you playing that from? I thought .mlp files were locked out from playback with the renderer. (Once you encode with the encoder to generate the .thd (.mlp) file, the renderer can't input from said thd/mlp file.) Guess I'll have to poke around more! I thought they had that locked out to keep mlp restricted to the reference player (or external hardware). Or do you pipe it in like running the mix from your DAW? (And that's the part I missed.)
jimfisheye
2K Club - QQ Super Nova
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 3,038
Yeah, you know, I don't mean to dismiss anything or make snobby rules. Just that in the spirit of "Things that aren't the same are different."...
Music mixes can be idiosyncratic. It's still important to listen to some things with the proper reference.
What I'm afraid is that If the mixer just listen on headphones (as the mass people will do) we may loose some great opportunities of discrete, panning, moving, Much Tops/Wides engaged, etc. for the people like us that like that. Steven Wilson checks both with 7.1.4 and with Headphones using the 'different' renderer from Apple. He even makes additional 5.1 mixes to be checked and adapted better.
Fortunately, so far, there are many mixes that seems to be done with proper reference by the mixer, as they sound very good and engage well the Wides/Tops. And also the discrete Rears, that are sometimes forgetted in some 7.1.x mixes
Thanks, $300 isn't a lot of cash but since I don't do any recording it's a lot of money for a Kool display.
Four heights plus the wides would be 9.1.4. 7.1.6 would mean six heights (top front, top middle, top rear).
Similar threads
