A local recording studio has recently invested in Atmos system, and they have been doing ~some~ immersive sound work, but their non-Atmos mix work has suffered -- yeah the basic bread-n-butter stereo mixing. It's like they're mixing in Atmos all the time. The problem with Atmos, IMO, is that it can be a detrimental distraction. So this opens an oppty for stereo studios to step in and take work away from the Atmos distracted studios. I'm sorry I may not be articulate enough, but hopefully getting my point across.
Thank you for this video Kyle. I am one of those so called "bedroom producers" and have been using Cubase since 2010 or 2011. Since version 12 came out I got myself Nuendo as well. Mixing and doing stuff in Dolby Atmos via the Binaural downmix is a lot of fun but it's really hard to find some decent videos explaining basics. Everyone jumps straight to the "fun bit" and leaves a lot of the important details out. One thing I have to say though... As much as I would like music to be produced in this format I don't think it will stick for long. Yes, I know it's been present for about 10 years. What I mean is "as consumer audio format for everyday music". Just look at 5.1. Where is it? How many people actually have 5.1 setup at home and listen to music that way? To fully experience Dolby Atmos you really need proper speaker setup and those are very expensive. Binaural mixes are very dependent on the listener and don't work for a lot of people. I don't think we will move to Dolby Atmos full time anytime soon. And at the moment the only places to listen to music like that is streaming platforms and most of the people are not even aware that you can stream binaural versions of the song. PS: If you play ADM file on your computer through a standard player of your choice. It most of the time just plays left and right speaker channel from standard bed.
Fantastic technology and what fun to assign audio to objects in space and place those objects for artistic design. I enjoyed watching the objects as I was listening.
i appreciate this video, and all work put into it. Visuals do help allot, but still this can't beat stereo. Would love to experience this on proper setup though. I don't see this for music, theater or movies or some kind of performance art , like audio visual then yes. Honestly for big and public spaces this must be amazing, i am just surprised how heavily this idea is pushed on studio producers who don't do these types of work. If there was no moving parts in this presentation this song would be even less impressive as is it now. Even your guest uses gaming and helicopter moving as an example
Can an individual HRTF profile be created and applied to a binaural rendering to achieve better resolution. Something like applying a display color calibration to adjust colors to a personified experience.
Dolby has really been pushing Atmos hard recently in order to try and increase sales but the fact of the matter is that Atmos has been around for over 20 years and has less than 10% of the world movie theater market. This is because Atmos is expensive on all levels from mixing to theater installation and the returns on investment are nonexistent. Additionally, Atmos "fold down" to stereo typically has poor results. Unless you are specifically mixing for Dolby Atmos films investing in Atmos for recording, mixing, or mastering is a waste of time and money.
If we only have 2 ears (effectively 2 preamps maximum for our brain) and we evolved to only process sounds this way in a basic stereo field, (with some somatic experience of bass frequency in our bodies), then why would we invest in technology that assumes we have 9 ears? It just seems flawed to me, unless you are in a movie theatre, big gaming studio or have decent distance from the sound sources,… but even in those instances our brains would have filled in the gaps if there were just 4 speakers. We know this from cochlear implant technology because the brain biologically does surround sound simulation via interpolation methods in our neural pathways. Why pay extra for something our brain does for free? This is why Atmos is doomed to be redundant.
This comment ignores the shape of the head and the outer ears. In the real world, sounds come from all directions, not just front left and right. Yet, we can still localize the direction of sound sources thanks to HRTF cues. Check out this video on binaural recording to learn more about how this is possible: ua-cam.com/video/S1SyaDbRqec/v-deo.html
@@AudioUniversity I disagree when you say I ignored that. Yes it is possible to overwhelm the brains need to form its own 3 dimensional experience of sound and replace it with external inputs, however it is still a largely redundant experiment. For it to work we have to isolate ourselves in a controlled sound environment and then experience dolby atmos only in that setting when our brain is unable to have feedback for spatial auditory simulation. This is why we only see it in cinemas and other isolated spaces, because it must be in a sensory depraved environment. In science we can use sensory deprivation treatment to deactivate the brains awareness and replace it with things like atmos, however this is not solving a problem, it is just forcing us into a sensory depraved environment, which for most people is an unnecessary, impractical and unnatural replacement. In the real world and over 99% of listening experiences and people, there is no need at all for atmos, as our brains (when not sensory deprived) will create the full spatial experience for us. This is why most people instinctively reject dolby Atmos and now it is being almost forced on us, as it is a solution for problem that doesn’t need to be solved. A lot of research funding and investment has gone into it, but it will ultimately fail to have market impact, and is already basically failing on launch for these reasons.
Why would one need to mix in Atmos, or even other types of surround sound? Well you mention the movie theater and games. How did the surround effect get there? Someone mixed it.
@@DeltaWhiskeyBravo13579 Outside a sensory deprived environment like a cinema, one that disables the natural spatial surround simulation our brain creates, then Atmos is redundant. Most people experience music via headphone (2 ears only) or via a single source speaker, maybe 2, in a work or home or public space … to upturn universal recording standards for a 9.1 system that nearly no one will ever purchase, or listen to outside of a cinema, means Atmos is a waste of everyone’s time, energy and money.
just proves technology can't help crap music. not impressed at all, but perhaps I am placing too much emphasis on the music and not enough on the computer stuff. I'm too old fashioned, I guess. Music matters more to me than Atmos trickery. You might as well pump noise into it. Garbage in, garbage out, just more shiny poop
@@AudioUniversity actually, @jen3800 has been given official music grading and appraisal privileges from the president of the universe. All that is good or bad is determined by @jen3800, no other opinions matter anymore. Not sure how you missed this, all over the news. jokes aside i hated the song too but it's completely irrelevant
A local recording studio has recently invested in Atmos system, and they have been doing ~some~ immersive sound work, but their non-Atmos mix work has suffered -- yeah the basic bread-n-butter stereo mixing. It's like they're mixing in Atmos all the time. The problem with Atmos, IMO, is that it can be a detrimental distraction. So this opens an oppty for stereo studios to step in and take work away from the Atmos distracted studios. I'm sorry I may not be articulate enough, but hopefully getting my point across.
Up your Atmos format rate to help defray costs, add qualified staff…
Thank you for this video Kyle.
I am one of those so called "bedroom producers" and have been using Cubase since 2010 or 2011. Since version 12 came out I got myself Nuendo as well. Mixing and doing stuff in Dolby Atmos via the Binaural downmix is a lot of fun but it's really hard to find some decent videos explaining basics. Everyone jumps straight to the "fun bit" and leaves a lot of the important details out.
One thing I have to say though... As much as I would like music to be produced in this format I don't think it will stick for long. Yes, I know it's been present for about 10 years. What I mean is "as consumer audio format for everyday music".
Just look at 5.1. Where is it? How many people actually have 5.1 setup at home and listen to music that way?
To fully experience Dolby Atmos you really need proper speaker setup and those are very expensive. Binaural mixes are very dependent on the listener and don't work for a lot of people.
I don't think we will move to Dolby Atmos full time anytime soon. And at the moment the only places to listen to music like that is streaming platforms and most of the people are not even aware that you can stream binaural versions of the song.
PS: If you play ADM file on your computer through a standard player of your choice. It most of the time just plays left and right speaker channel from standard bed.
Steinberg is my favourite,but i only have cubase 5 and Nuendo 4 which are only in 32bit. Thank you Kyle for this video..
It’s VERY powerful software! Glad to hear you’ve been using it, @ebormajaw8064!
Fantastic technology and what fun to assign audio to objects in space and place those objects for artistic design. I enjoyed watching the objects as I was listening.
Great stuff Kyle. It's pretty amazing what can be done.
Couldn't agree more! I've always been fascinated by binaural recording, but binaural rendering takes it to a new level! Thanks for watching.
I LOVE THIS CHANNEL
Thank you! Very glad to hear this!
i appreciate this video, and all work put into it. Visuals do help allot, but still this can't beat stereo. Would love to experience this on proper setup though. I don't see this for music, theater or movies or some kind of performance art , like audio visual then yes. Honestly for big and public spaces this must be amazing, i am just surprised how heavily this idea is pushed on studio producers who don't do these types of work. If there was no moving parts in this presentation this song would be even less impressive as is it now. Even your guest uses gaming and helicopter moving as an example
Thanks for the video, is there a way to listen to it rendered in dolby atmos since youtube doesn't support it?
The binaural rendering works in headphones through UA-cam! Only 2 channel audio!
Is there any reason I would want to use the bed instead of an object or objects??
Can an individual HRTF profile be created and applied to a binaural rendering to achieve better resolution. Something like applying a display color calibration to adjust colors to a personified experience.
Went come to band
@ Audio University, do u know how he was able to change the skin colour of his interface to Brown in nuendo.
steinberg.help/nuendo/v8/en/cubase_nuendo/topics/customizing/colors_appearance_t.html
Hear backing singer as well
❤
Dolby has really been pushing Atmos hard recently in order to try and increase sales but the fact of the matter is that Atmos has been around for over 20 years and has less than 10% of the world movie theater market.
This is because Atmos is expensive on all levels from mixing to theater installation and the returns on investment are nonexistent.
Additionally, Atmos "fold down" to stereo typically has poor results.
Unless you are specifically mixing for Dolby Atmos films investing in Atmos for recording, mixing, or mastering is a waste of time and money.
Backing sings bring it forward same as other front singer so can hear backing singer
Move round one to other
The mix (i.e. 3:00-) seems to have way too much sub here.
If we only have 2 ears (effectively 2 preamps maximum for our brain) and we evolved to only process sounds this way in a basic stereo field, (with some somatic experience of bass frequency in our bodies), then why would we invest in technology that assumes we have 9 ears? It just seems flawed to me, unless you are in a movie theatre, big gaming studio or have decent distance from the sound sources,… but even in those instances our brains would have filled in the gaps if there were just 4 speakers. We know this from cochlear implant technology because the brain biologically does surround sound simulation via interpolation methods in our neural pathways. Why pay extra for something our brain does for free? This is why Atmos is doomed to be redundant.
This comment ignores the shape of the head and the outer ears. In the real world, sounds come from all directions, not just front left and right. Yet, we can still localize the direction of sound sources thanks to HRTF cues.
Check out this video on binaural recording to learn more about how this is possible: ua-cam.com/video/S1SyaDbRqec/v-deo.html
@@AudioUniversity I disagree when you say I ignored that. Yes it is possible to overwhelm the brains need to form its own 3 dimensional experience of sound and replace it with external inputs, however it is still a largely redundant experiment. For it to work we have to isolate ourselves in a controlled sound environment and then experience dolby atmos only in that setting when our brain is unable to have feedback for spatial auditory simulation. This is why we only see it in cinemas and other isolated spaces, because it must be in a sensory depraved environment. In science we can use sensory deprivation treatment to deactivate the brains awareness and replace it with things like atmos, however this is not solving a problem, it is just forcing us into a sensory depraved environment, which for most people is an unnecessary, impractical and unnatural replacement. In the real world and over 99% of listening experiences and people, there is no need at all for atmos, as our brains (when not sensory deprived) will create the full spatial experience for us. This is why most people instinctively reject dolby Atmos and now it is being almost forced on us, as it is a solution for problem that doesn’t need to be solved. A lot of research funding and investment has gone into it, but it will ultimately fail to have market impact, and is already basically failing on launch for these reasons.
Why would one need to mix in Atmos, or even other types of surround sound? Well you mention the movie theater and games. How did the surround effect get there? Someone mixed it.
@@DeltaWhiskeyBravo13579 Outside a sensory deprived environment like a cinema, one that disables the natural spatial surround simulation our brain creates, then Atmos is redundant. Most people experience music via headphone (2 ears only) or via a single source speaker, maybe 2, in a work or home or public space … to upturn universal recording standards for a 9.1 system that nearly no one will ever purchase, or listen to outside of a cinema, means Atmos is a waste of everyone’s time, energy and money.
@@AudioUniversityMaybe sounds of environment yes, but here is music in question, most of the time if not always performer is right in front of you
just proves technology can't help crap music. not impressed at all, but perhaps I am placing too much emphasis on the music and not enough on the computer stuff. I'm too old fashioned, I guess. Music matters more to me than Atmos trickery. You might as well pump noise into it. Garbage in, garbage out, just more shiny poop
I agree that the music is the most important part. I disagree that you can deem this music (or any music) objectively bad. Not good to YOUR taste…
@@AudioUniversity actually, @jen3800 has been given official music grading and appraisal privileges from the president of the universe. All that is good or bad is determined by @jen3800, no other opinions matter anymore. Not sure how you missed this, all over the news. jokes aside i hated the song too but it's completely irrelevant