HiRez Poll Wilson, Steven - THE FUTURE BITES [Blu-Ray Audio (Dolby Atmos)]

[madship]

"Very happy and proud to have The Future Bites nominated twice for next year’s Grammy awards, in the categories for Best Immersive Audio album, and Best Boxed Set or Limited Edition Package. See ya in LA!" @recordingacademy #grammys @thefuturebites

If Steven Wilson doesn't win this time, he'll be the Susan Lucci of surround music and eventually the award will be named after him (ie Irving G. Thalberg)

 

[paligap]

This is the first PT/SW surround release I haven't purchased, but after listening to it in Atmos on Apple Music today, I might have to at least get the blu-ray. I had heard some of the individual songs in stereo before, and they just didn't move me. Listening to the whole album in Atmos was a different experience for me.

 

[notfer]

I’m surprised it is nominated for best boxed set. I regret buying it. Not because of the music, but because of how the concept and the price made me feel “attacked” or guilty of purchasing deluxe edition box sets.
But as far as surround mix, it deserves to be there.

 

[ar surround]

This is the first PT/SW surround release I haven't purchased, but after listening to it in Atmos on Apple Music today, I might have to at least get the blu-ray. I had heard some of the individual songs in stereo before, and they just didn't move me. Listening to the whole album in Atmos was a different experience for me.

I listened to the Atmos mix when I first got the Bluray ($18). I liked it. I did not like listening to the stereo videos in Auro 3D all that much. So I agree with you that the Atmos mix makes a big difference and is an integral part of the artistic content.

 

[srbjab]

I listened to the Atmos mix when I first got the Bluray ($18). I liked it. I did not like listening to the stereo videos in Auro 3D all that much. So I agree with you that the Atmos mix makes a big difference and is an integral part of the artistic content.

While I'm happy to have the standalone blu-ray, it will probably be the Steven Wilson title I return to least often. The excellent surround mixes certainly elevate the material, but not to the point of needing an expensive box set. In retrospect, I think the whole TFB concept combined with the marketing strategy was a bit of a miscalculation, but I know many disagree. Steven Wilson is overdue for recognition for his surround mixes, totally separate from whatever they are packaged in.

 

[FrankieZappa]

I gave this disc another spin just this morning...
Something "strange" occurred, or maybe it Is only my perception of things... I usually listen to this album in DTS-HD 5.1 and this morning I tried LPCM 5.1... I found that to be more "immersive",a little bit more discrete...I repeat, maybe it's just me since I know they are both lossless formats and should sound absolutely the same. Went back to listen to the DTS-HD mix and...I prefer the LPCM more. Strange. Changing my vote from 8 to 9.

Anyone else experienced this kind of thing, maybe the other way around (preferring the DTS over LPCM)?

 

[Sal1950]

Anyone else experienced this kind of thing, maybe the other way around (preferring the DTS over LPCM)?

Possible the mix plays at a slightly different level?

 

[FrankieZappa]

Possible the mix plays at a slightly different level?

Who knows? Unfortunately I don’t possess the finesse nor the hardware to understand that…but volumes levels apart I can notice/believe I notice more separation.
Duh!

 

[AYanguas]

I gave this disc another spin just this morning...
Something "strange" occurred, or maybe it Is only my perception of things... I usually listen to this album in DTS-HD 5.1 and this morning I tried LPCM 5.1... I found that to be more "immersive",a little bit more discrete...I repeat, maybe it's just me since I know they are both lossless formats and should sound absolutely the same. Went back to listen to the DTS-HD mix and...I prefer the LPCM more. Strange. Changing my vote from 8 to 9.

Anyone else experienced this kind of thing, maybe the other way around (preferring the DTS over LPCM)?

Do you have 5.1 speakers? or 7.1

It is known that, at least in Denon, DTS duplicate the surround speakers to the rear speakers in a 7.1 config. This is to emulate the typical locations of 5.1 with the surrounds more behind than in 7.1 that is usual to have them at the side about 90º.

This may change the output to the rear channels, when in DTS. This does not occur when output is LPCM.

All this apply when there is NO AVR Sound Mode that includes up-mixing. Also check that your up-mixing sound modes are not applied when comparing. (No DSU, No Neural:X, No Auro-3D, No Auro-2D, No Virtualization).

 

[Sal1950]

This may change the output to the rear channels, when in DTS. This does not occur when output is LPCM.

That's a good reason when ripping to go LPCM when offered the choice. I always do and never understood why disc mixers even bother putting both on the disc?

 

[FrankieZappa]

Do you have 5.1 speakers? or 7.1

It is known that, at least in Denon, DTS duplicate the surround speakers to the rear speakers in a 7.1 config. This is to emulate the typical locations of 5.1 with the surrounds more behind than in 7.1 that is usual to have them at the side about 90º.

This may change the output to the rear channels, when in DTS. This does not occur when output is LPCM.

All this apply when there is NO AVR Sound Mode that includes up-mixing. Also check that your up-mixing sound modes are not applied when comparing. (No DSU, No Neural:X, No Auro-3D, No Auro-2D, No Virtualization).

I used to have an Atmos system,a 5.1.2 but I switched back to a simple 5.1 last month.
The difference is subtle, but it’s there.

 

[Sal1950]

I used to have an Atmos system,a 5.1.2 but I switched back to a simple 5.1 last month.
The difference is subtle, but it’s there.

I hate to say it but for Atmos to really work it needs at least 4 speakers, correctly placed overhead. Two speakers, or ceiling bounce arrangements rarely work out well if at all. They can even be detrimental to the focus of a good 5.1 base system, blurring the desired surround effects.
No offense meant to anyone.

 

[FrankieZappa]

I hate to say it but for Atmos to really work it needs at least 4 speakers, correctly placed overhead. Two speakers, or ceiling bounce arrangements rarely work out well if at all. They can even be detrimental to the focus of a good 5.1 base system, blurring the desired surround effects.
No offense meant to anyone.

None taken and it’s one of the reason I downgraded…better a solid 5.1 than a “weak” Atmos. I agree with you.

 

[himey]

None taken and it’s one of the reason I downgraded…better a solid 5.1 than a “weak” Atmos. I agree with you.

I hear so many posts about how weak the heights are on different Atmos mixes that if I do the math, the percentage of releases with a quality 3D effect, would be well under 1% of my music collection. My hobby is music, surround sound is a big part of that but not the only part. Thankfully these Atmos mixes translate VERY well to 5 full range channels.

 

[Sal1950]

I hear so many posts about how weak the heights are on different Atmos mixes that if I do the math, the percentage of releases with a quality 3D effect, would be well under 1% of my music collection.

True, many folks desire a lot of overhead action, (I love it) but that's not really what it's all about depending on your musical tastes. When we talk about our 5.1 systems most classical-jazz guys have always called a lot of action in the surround channels gimmicky. They want the mix mainly to put them in a seat at the concert hall or nightclub, only adding sounds of the environment in the rear channels. It's exactly the same for the immersion formats.
I've had friends (some musicians) listen to my rig playing the awesome BookaShade, Yello Point, Mando Diao Aeita mixes and they don't get it, still believing in the old stereo window to the stage thing. I try to get them to understand the artistry of a heavily immersive mix but they still don't get it.
I'm hoping the revived interest Atmos, etc has brought to the public eye that this wave of interest in multich sound doesn't crash like it's done a couple times in the past.

 

[himey]

True, many folks desire a lot of overhead action, (I love it) but that's not really what it's all about depending on your musical tastes. When we talk about our 5.1 systems most classical-jazz guys have always called a lot of action in the surround channels gimmicky. They want the mix mainly to put them in a seat at the concert hall or nightclub, only adding sounds of the environment in the rear channels. It's exactly the same for the immersion formats.
I've had friends (some musicians) listen to my rig playing the awesome BookaShade, Yello Point, Mando Diao Aeita mixes and they don't get it, still believing in the old stereo window to the stage thing. I try to get them to understand the artistry of a heavily immersive mix but they still don't get it.
I'm hoping the revived interest Atmos, etc has brought to the public eye that this wave of interest in multich sound doesn't crash like it's done a couple times in the past.

If you don't "get" Yello Point in surround sound you likely never will. You might as well stick to mono. Some people just don't/can't care.

 

[Nyad]

I was one of the people taken in by "Swiss Army Knife" receivers promising Atmos (the Sony STR-DN1080) while it does give more of full room feeling can't say the overhead effects are profound with 5.1.2.

The amp was an upgrade in some respects, it doesn't degrade DSD to redbook output like my old Onkyo 609, however it refuses to accept Quad blu-ray from the Pink Floyd immersion sets (unlike the Onkyo) playing only the front channels.

Such are the perils of the budget end of spectrum

 

[Sal1950]

The amp was an upgrade in some respects, it doesn't degrade DSD to redbook output like my old Onkyo 609, however it refuses to accept Quad blu-ray from the Pink Floyd immersion sets (unlike the Onkyo) playing only the front channels.

My Marantz is the same way, decodes 4.0 files in all sort of screwy ways.
A minute or so in Gary's MMH to add silent C and .1 channels fixed them all.

 

[Klaus Rosenthal]

Man I love this album. Seems divisive for SW fans, but truth be told I like electronic music more than prog rock so it works for me. Never really got into Porcupine Tree or his previous solo albums but since he is so respected as a mixer I decided to give this one a go (helps that it's still in print, only $18 and comes with a pre-creased slipcover, thanks amazon).

As far as the consumerism aspect of The Future Bites, I wasn't sure if he was being serious or if it was tongue-in-cheek but it is definitely the latter as he got Sir Elton John "The world's most famous consumer" poking fun at 180g vinyl reissues and box sets whilst simultaneously selling a limited edition of one deluxe set priced at £10,000 for charity. His beef is more towards box sets being overpriced and filled with filler content, "Nothing you would ever need, nothing you would ever want to listen to more than once", a topic we are all too familiar with, yet still buying anyways.

Really dig all of the songs. I feel like there might be a slow burn situation here where fans will slowly come around as Steven Wilson continues into a more enigmatic direction as he's indicating for the next album 'Harmony Codex'.

And of course the first Atmos mix by the man himself is everything you would expect. Super engaging and immersive, excellent fidelity. Might not be your cup of tea musically but this one gets a well deserved 10 from me.

 

[jimfisheye]

The 7.1.4 mix sounds great. Kind of expected to hear something interesting mix-wise and of course he delivered. Interesting use of the extra channels and the whole works.

Aside from some very brief musical moments of interest to me this album is a real sleeper and there's very little here for me. Not likely to listen again. But the mix sounds great and it was an excuse to power up the additional 6 channels of amps.

This is like the early days of CDs all over again. Remember when you had a total of 5 CDs and for 3 of them your vinyl copies sounded better?