To Sam, talking about calibrating his brain : things behind the head are positioned by EQ... they sound duller as ones ears and head are blocking sounds behind us in real life.. and that's the only way we can tell as humans without head movement. So, until you "know" it's behind, you can't tell if that is just the tone of the sound or whether it is behind . Head movement is how we tell in real life that it's behind and not just a duller sounding bass in front.
I'm only just starting to explore Atmos after getting a modern (only a year old model!) phone that has Atmos capabilities, with Tidal. Early experiences are that the Atmos mixes just don't sound very 3 dimensional at all .. not what I'm used to compares to binaurally recorded field recordings, AMSR or the occasional 3-Dio (think that's the name) 'mic in the middle of a random band's session' music.. I also found, with one track that the Atmos mix seemed to have percussive elements dulled and mid bass hiked up so it was a lot warmer. The stero mix sounded slightly flatter (but not loads) but had more bite and tacticlity. I wonder if the stereo was a render or separate mix ... How can one find out? This track was called "Raat Ki Rani" by Arooj Aftab - a kind of Sade vocal feel with soft worldish music. I only picked this as it seemed to be well recorded and not too pop. And new to me, so easier to examine without expectation. Any thoughts on attack and bite being softened on Atmos .. perhaps?
I missed the live stream - in response to Sam saying he can see all these squares on the a screen: So can I mate, so can I .. (it's called the PDP live stream). Ho ho ho.
When it comes to DAWs for mixing in Atmos, I would have to say that many fail in one very important aspect, and arguably the most important and it's panners. Cubase/Nuendo got it right. They are just much more flexible and have more options, and at the same time, they are really easy to use. Pro Tools panners are a bit clanky, but still ok, but those Logic style panners that are in Logic, Studio One and Fiedler Atmos Composer are just very limited. And I feel like those panners force me to make certain panning decision, because they are designed to work a certain way and kind of telling me how to pan, unlike Pro Tools or Cubase/Nuendo where *I* have total control of panning and I don't have to fight with panners. I guess it may too subjective, but I really urge people interested in Atmos to give Cubase/Nuendo a spin, and you might even improve your Atmos mixing experience even more. :)
I have a cassette of 3D sound recorded off Radio 1 in conjunction with Tomorrow's World on TV... Bomb the Bass did a 3D track. Is that the same Roland system thing? Oh, yes, Mark just said it was ...
Yea, I'd venture to say if you're a mix engineer, it's going to be required in the industry to be able to do atmos mixes, if industry standard doesn't BECOME atmos. I'm getting into it. -- MARK - "interlinked..." my brain "A system of cells interlinked within cells interlinked within cells interlinked within one stem... And dreadfully distinct against the dark, a tall white fountain played."
You need just X Y potentiometer I guess in Atmos ? Would be highly simple if you can map elevation and horizontal panning in midi in the atmos program james
I've not got to this part of the recorded live stream yet, but I was thinking about fancy controllers for Atmos panning.. started off with like a skeleton trackball like thing with a stick coming out the side so you can position the stick in 3D space, the some others ... ... Then I realised, all you need is two small scrub wheels, one for horizontal panning, the second for elevation. Easy to operate with one hand with practice .
One thing I can’t wrap my head around is how the “treating every element separately and just pan it where you want it to be” approach in atmos would fold back to stereo in a proper way. I mean, since one of the first things we learn in mixing is doing the exact opposite?
This is because you have to instead think of it as a computational thing, not in terms of audio. Think of graphics engines and gaming. You can't draw an entire picture on a screen and redraw every single pixel each time - it's computationally inefficient and gets complex. What is instead done, is objects in the visual space are given positions and their forms are calculated depending on view points, lighting effects etc etc etc. And that is then kind of mapped on top of a "bed" of the far-field visual environment Same with Atmos. The Atmos engine has to calculate the phase, timing, volume and probably tone at your ears (in binaural) for sounds in 3D space. And it also has to be able to fold down to stereo or 5.1 or any other configuration. It can't really do that with a soundscape you have created for your own speaker set-up that is fixed , it has to be deconstructed in to 3D positions and separate objects in order for the calculations to work .. I wonder if beds in Atmos are unable to be translated as well to the different fold down options as objects are .. it would make sense if they calculated differently and therefore better for one or the other .
Or maybe website design is a better analogy : if you fix images and text in pixel positions for your screen size and layout, the website won't work on different devices, like between mobile and desktop, sometimes even different resolutions. I'm not up to date with website design, but surely you give relative positions and layers of images and text and the back end works out how to beat translate that to each different viewing format.
I still cannot give a flying thing about Atmos. But happy to see it's keeping you busy and excited. As long as I still have the option to avoid listening to music in Atmos myself, I am perfectly happy to live and let live.
Memo to James: Reason (DAW) changed their company name from Propellerhead to Reason Studios . It works great as a VST3 in other DAWS.
It would be good if you could use an Xbox controller for Atmos panning.
To Sam, talking about calibrating his brain : things behind the head are positioned by EQ... they sound duller as ones ears and head are blocking sounds behind us in real life.. and that's the only way we can tell as humans without head movement.
So, until you "know" it's behind, you can't tell if that is just the tone of the sound or whether it is behind .
Head movement is how we tell in real life that it's behind and not just a duller sounding bass in front.
I'm only just starting to explore Atmos after getting a modern (only a year old model!) phone that has Atmos capabilities, with Tidal.
Early experiences are that the Atmos mixes just don't sound very 3 dimensional at all .. not what I'm used to compares to binaurally recorded field recordings, AMSR or the occasional 3-Dio (think that's the name) 'mic in the middle of a random band's session' music..
I also found, with one track that the Atmos mix seemed to have percussive elements dulled and mid bass hiked up so it was a lot warmer. The stero mix sounded slightly flatter (but not loads) but had more bite and tacticlity. I wonder if the stereo was a render or separate mix ... How can one find out?
This track was called "Raat Ki Rani" by Arooj Aftab - a kind of Sade vocal feel with soft worldish music.
I only picked this as it seemed to be well recorded and not too pop. And new to me, so easier to examine without expectation.
Any thoughts on attack and bite being softened on Atmos .. perhaps?
I missed the live stream - in response to Sam saying he can see all these squares on the a screen: So can I mate, so can I .. (it's called the PDP live stream). Ho ho ho.
When it comes to DAWs for mixing in Atmos, I would have to say that many fail in one very important aspect, and arguably the most important and it's panners. Cubase/Nuendo got it right. They are just much more flexible and have more options, and at the same time, they are really easy to use. Pro Tools panners are a bit clanky, but still ok, but those Logic style panners that are in Logic, Studio One and Fiedler Atmos Composer are just very limited. And I feel like those panners force me to make certain panning decision, because they are designed to work a certain way and kind of telling me how to pan, unlike Pro Tools or Cubase/Nuendo where *I* have total control of panning and I don't have to fight with panners. I guess it may too subjective, but I really urge people interested in Atmos to give Cubase/Nuendo a spin, and you might even improve your Atmos mixing experience even more. :)
You can have atmos in any daw using the Vidler Atmos Composer :)
I mix in Atmos 1st now as its just better and the stereo mix comes from the fold down :)
I have a cassette of 3D sound recorded off Radio 1 in conjunction with Tomorrow's World on TV... Bomb the Bass did a 3D track. Is that the same Roland system thing? Oh, yes, Mark just said it was ...
You can mix in stereo binaural with the 990 for Atmos I guess
Yea, I'd venture to say if you're a mix engineer, it's going to be required in the industry to be able to do atmos mixes, if industry standard doesn't BECOME atmos. I'm getting into it. -- MARK - "interlinked..." my brain "A system of cells interlinked within cells interlinked within cells interlinked within one stem... And dreadfully distinct against the dark, a tall white fountain played."
You need just X Y potentiometer I guess in Atmos ? Would be highly simple if you can map elevation and horizontal panning in midi in the atmos program james
I've not got to this part of the recorded live stream yet, but I was thinking about fancy controllers for Atmos panning.. started off with like a skeleton trackball like thing with a stick coming out the side so you can position the stick in 3D space, the some others ...
... Then I realised, all you need is two small scrub wheels, one for horizontal panning, the second for elevation. Easy to operate with one hand with practice .
@@natdenchfield8061 Yep just what I meant/though
One thing I can’t wrap my head around is how the “treating every element separately and just pan it where you want it to be” approach in atmos would fold back to stereo in a proper way. I mean, since one of the first things we learn in mixing is doing the exact opposite?
All the engineers Ive heard said that the suming down of Dolby sound better than the stereo mix, PDP include back in the day
converting atmos mix to stereo over the stereo mix I mean*
This is because you have to instead think of it as a computational thing, not in terms of audio. Think of graphics engines and gaming. You can't draw an entire picture on a screen and redraw every single pixel each time - it's computationally inefficient and gets complex.
What is instead done, is objects in the visual space are given positions and their forms are calculated depending on view points, lighting effects etc etc etc. And that is then kind of mapped on top of a "bed" of the far-field visual environment
Same with Atmos. The Atmos engine has to calculate the phase, timing, volume and probably tone at your ears (in binaural) for sounds in 3D space. And it also has to be able to fold down to stereo or 5.1 or any other configuration. It can't really do that with a soundscape you have created for your own speaker set-up that is fixed , it has to be deconstructed in to 3D positions and separate objects in order for the calculations to work ..
I wonder if beds in Atmos are unable to be translated as well to the different fold down options as objects are .. it would make sense if they calculated differently and therefore better for one or the other .
Or maybe website design is a better analogy : if you fix images and text in pixel positions for your screen size and layout, the website won't work on different devices, like between mobile and desktop, sometimes even different resolutions.
I'm not up to date with website design, but surely you give relative positions and layers of images and text and the back end works out how to beat translate that to each different viewing format.
@@DarkTrapStudio yeah I’ve heard that too, that’s what raised the question.
Best Daw was not a thing but Studio One is seems to be really the best Daw, I guess only reaper could argue about things
Moutarde de Dijon ?
I still cannot give a flying thing about Atmos. But happy to see it's keeping you busy and excited. As long as I still have the option to avoid listening to music in Atmos myself, I am perfectly happy to live and let live.
1:06:38 😂😂😂