The thing is, it is a fantastic technology, and is in many cases not out of reach to makers. Delivery is really the issue. It should be easy, but Dolby hasn't made it easy. The Binaural renders alone for me are worth it, but are best experienced in realtime with the engine, which can only be done in a few places right now, as described in the video. Shame really.
I made my song on reason studio and im trying surround mix for almost 15 years since i discover steinberg nuendo, but now im doing HDR video with davinci resolve and my bmpcc 4k camera and there atmos renderer inside da vinci with the Fairlight page mixer is by far the easyiest and cheaper way to make atmos or surround mix, it's totaly dedicated to make immersive sound with 4k and beyond video, buy any of black magic design hardware you get da vinci studio and dolby atmos renderer almost free.
Sorry for the late reply! Yes, Black Magic's tools are fantastic for post production work. Unfortunately, I don't find it too useful for music production from scratch, and moving around 40 tracks from machine to machine is feels a little tedious!
While your explanation and playing were great, this wasn’t really a binaural mix. Any number of psychoacoustic plugins can give that extra width that you were going for during your explanation. Having used Pro16 & Pro24 ahead of Cubase through to Cubase 1 on Atari, which were obviously just MIDI sequencers and not DAWs. Through to Cubase Audio and XT on the Falcon etc. To Cubase VST on Windows, arguably the first version of what we now call a DAW and also still having one of the earliest serialised, serial port dongles for Nuendo, which was used extensively with Hammerfall hardware for multichannel surround mixing. I’m quite familiar with the Steinberg range and digital audio production, so please don’t take this as some random comment by someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about, criticising your video. Also, your use of loudness was a bit too much in parts, with a serious overuse of compression and brick wall limiting/gaining in parts and some questionable dynamics processing and tone control on parts of your V/O. However, this is an AWESOME video with great production, both musically and visually and some FANTASTIC playing. Which also manages to give a great overview explanation of mono, stereo, surround recording and playback, which is almost impossible to do in a short video. Which is why I gave this video a MASSIVE 👍 This is an EXCELLENT video and I look forward to watching more of your stuff. Thank you for the very hard work and serious amount of time that put in to this video. BTW and I’m not sure if it’s the same these days as I’ve not been involved in any commercial TV/film music/audio production for a long time. But Dolby certification as far as mix facilities were concerned, at least here in the UK. Was basically a money making racket headed by Dolby, that forced you to at least have had a final monitor session, preferably a full mix, done at a “certified” post production facility that Dolby had “certified” and “licensed” it’s acoustics and equipment for. This was in spite of the fact that many private and project facilities could have easily technically matched such “certified” facilities but would never have gained a certification for the outputs as they didn’t and couldn’t pay Dolby for the license. There’s obviously a lot more to it than that simple overview that I’ve just explained and I’m quite sure that room acoustics and response were a big part of the standards set by Dolby. However, it did used to be a very small clique of facilities, which on the face of it were seemingly charging a huge amount of money for the “privilege” set out by Dolby. If things are still a bit similar, it may explain why you are finding it difficult to distribute your Atmos mixes. This is one of the problems when a monopolised bespoke technology becomes and global industry standard. Cheers, Dave.
This is the Binaural render that the Dolby Atmos Renderer provided based off of my Atmos mix. So, it is Dolby's Binaural solution, similar to what you would get from earbuds on Tidal and Apple Music. So, that is what I posted on this. 🤷 I appreciate your insight into the Dolby certification thing, which I agree with (I reference the Dolby certified Computer/motherboard thing, which is obviously a licensing ploy). I am glad you appreciated the video!
![[3D Binaural Audio] GTs, Prototypes & Touring Cars Testing at Monza Circuit!](/img/n.gif)
I'm Travis Devin and this is my favorite video on UA-cam.
Thanks bud!
Nice work, Drake!
The Dolby Atmos Hustle. It's amsuing. Its like Ray Tracing in video games. Good luck with it becoming something common folks want.
The thing is, it is a fantastic technology, and is in many cases not out of reach to makers. Delivery is really the issue. It should be easy, but Dolby hasn't made it easy. The Binaural renders alone for me are worth it, but are best experienced in realtime with the engine, which can only be done in a few places right now, as described in the video. Shame really.
@@drakemakesmusic9966 Maybe best for IMAX theaters?
I made my song on reason studio and im trying surround mix for almost 15 years since i discover steinberg nuendo, but now im doing HDR video with davinci resolve and my bmpcc 4k camera and there atmos renderer inside da vinci with the Fairlight page mixer is by far the easyiest and cheaper way to make atmos or surround mix, it's totaly dedicated to make immersive sound with 4k and beyond video, buy any of black magic design hardware you get da vinci studio and dolby atmos renderer almost free.
Sorry for the late reply! Yes, Black Magic's tools are fantastic for post production work. Unfortunately, I don't find it too useful for music production from scratch, and moving around 40 tracks from machine to machine is feels a little tedious!
Move over Kenny G. There’s a new king in town!
I would take 1% of his success.
While your explanation and playing were great, this wasn’t really a binaural mix. Any number of psychoacoustic plugins can give that extra width that you were going for during your explanation.
Having used Pro16 & Pro24 ahead of Cubase through to Cubase 1 on Atari, which were obviously just MIDI sequencers and not DAWs. Through to Cubase Audio and XT on the Falcon etc. To Cubase VST on Windows, arguably the first version of what we now call a DAW and also still having one of the earliest serialised, serial port dongles for Nuendo, which was used extensively with Hammerfall hardware for multichannel surround mixing.
I’m quite familiar with the Steinberg range and digital audio production, so please don’t take this as some random comment by someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about, criticising your video.
Also, your use of loudness was a bit too much in parts, with a serious overuse of compression and brick wall limiting/gaining in parts and some questionable dynamics processing and tone control on parts of your V/O.
However, this is an AWESOME video with great production, both musically and visually and some FANTASTIC playing. Which also manages to give a great overview explanation of mono, stereo, surround recording and playback, which is almost impossible to do in a short video. Which is why I gave this video a MASSIVE 👍
This is an EXCELLENT video and I look forward to watching more of your stuff. Thank you for the very hard work and serious amount of time that put in to this video.
BTW and I’m not sure if it’s the same these days as I’ve not been involved in any commercial TV/film music/audio production for a long time. But Dolby certification as far as mix facilities were concerned, at least here in the UK. Was basically a money making racket headed by Dolby, that forced you to at least have had a final monitor session, preferably a full mix, done at a “certified” post production facility that Dolby had “certified” and “licensed” it’s acoustics and equipment for.
This was in spite of the fact that many private and project facilities could have easily technically matched such “certified” facilities but would never have gained a certification for the outputs as they didn’t and couldn’t pay Dolby for the license.
There’s obviously a lot more to it than that simple overview that I’ve just explained and I’m quite sure that room acoustics and response were a big part of the standards set by Dolby. However, it did used to be a very small clique of facilities, which on the face of it were seemingly charging a huge amount of money for the “privilege” set out by Dolby.
If things are still a bit similar, it may explain why you are finding it difficult to distribute your Atmos mixes. This is one of the problems when a monopolised bespoke technology becomes and global industry standard.
Cheers, Dave.
This is the Binaural render that the Dolby Atmos Renderer provided based off of my Atmos mix. So, it is Dolby's Binaural solution, similar to what you would get from earbuds on Tidal and Apple Music. So, that is what I posted on this. 🤷
I appreciate your insight into the Dolby certification thing, which I agree with (I reference the Dolby certified Computer/motherboard thing, which is obviously a licensing ploy).
I am glad you appreciated the video!