Beds vs. Objects: Mixing in Dolby Atmos, Part 1

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 2 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 16

  • @moshuajusic1811
    @moshuajusic1811 Рік тому +3

    Clearest explanation of the difference. 👍

  • @mixedbysplash6695
    @mixedbysplash6695 10 місяців тому +1

    Cool! ❤❤❤

  • @franlarsen80
    @franlarsen80 Рік тому +2

    Hi GK, what is the point of beds at all? Do they have any advantage? It seems that making everything objects is the best way to go, no?

    • @gkmixing
      @gkmixing  Рік тому +3

      Hi Fran! The number of objects is limited and you can run out of them quickly. I use beds for some effects like reverbs. Or if you want to pan something to a specific speaker there would be no need to do that with an object. Object panned to one of the side speakers will sound the same if it was panned to the side speaker in the bed. When I need more movement, or I want to unglue the sounds from "the walls" of immersive space, I would use objects as I would need access to all of the speakers to properly reproduce the placement I want, but when it's not needed the bed will do.

    • @franlarsen80
      @franlarsen80 Рік тому

      @@gkmixing OK, I see.... Thanks for sharing your knowledge.

    • @gkmixing
      @gkmixing  Рік тому

      @@franlarsen80 it’s my pleasure! 😇

    • @jordanhenshaw
      @jordanhenshaw 2 місяці тому

      That's how it's done in Alva Sorcerer. I think a key limitation in Atmos is that you don't have asymmetric scaling for audio objects, But Sorcerer works inside Blender, so asymmetric scaling is super easy. That way, as you say, you keep everything stupid simple by defining beds spatially as opposed to numerically. And you just don't animate it if you want static behavior.
      And also, theoretically there's no limitation to number of audio objects in Sorcerer, at least not on paper. Number of channels in the VSE is limited, but you'd have to be pretty insane to try to fill all of those at the same time in a sequence.

  • @MikeyOnTheWay
    @MikeyOnTheWay 5 місяців тому

    Great vid and sounds great! You got any master files we can download to put into our dolby renderer and use as a reference or just study it?

    • @gkmixing
      @gkmixing  5 місяців тому

      @@MikeyOnTheWay Thanks! For videos I take multitracks from Produce Like a Pro or Cambridge-MT Multitrack library as they are not copyrighted. There are hundreds of multitracks you can download for free on Cambridge-MT :)

  • @girkgirkus7236
    @girkgirkus7236 Рік тому +1

    Very good

  • @kudroy
    @kudroy Рік тому +1

    Cool video! How many speakers you need to mix in atmos? And what sound interface you must have?

    • @gkmixing
      @gkmixing  Рік тому +1

      I've started doing it on headphones, then transitioned to 5.1. And then I just found a studio that already had an Atmos setup (9.1.4). I contacted them and they allowed me to rent it from time to time. So it was a gradual process for me and I was expanding as I got more and more comfortable with this format.
      If you just thinking about going into Atmos, and don't have a full understanding of all the technical nuances (like how to set up a project, how panners work, what techniques work in Atmos and etc.) you can start with headphones using binaural playback. And when you get to use something like 7.1.4 setup you will already have a full technical understanding of how the format works and its quirks.
      And the future videos will be covering some of this stuff. Next video will be about panning in Atmos, and you can take some of those ideas and just experiment with them even in headphones. There is nothing wrong with that. In one of the interviews, Andrew Scheps said that he started working in Atmos in headphones before he got his setup.
      Hope this helps. :)

    • @gkmixing
      @gkmixing  Рік тому +1

      But the standard I guess would be 7.1.4 setup (12 speakers in total) and interface that has at least 12 outputs to connect to each speaker.

  • @jordanhenshaw
    @jordanhenshaw 2 місяці тому

    In Alva Sorcerer, I'm deleting the concept of beds entirely in favor of everything just being objects. You define "beds" the exact same way you define objects: with a mesh. The only difference is if you want "bed" behavior, you just make the mesh way bigger and you don't animate it. The key is that the software has to be able to asymmetrically scale audio objects, which Sorcerer now does.
    The first-principles truth here is we're just trying to control where audio comes from. "Where" is a spatial question, not a numerical question. So instead of defining a bed numerically, you define them spatially with a stretched cube (or other shape). This way you never even have to learn what a bed is. It no longer exists. Problem deleted. Best part is no part. Everything is just objects, big and small, animated or not animated.