Dolby Atmos coming soon for home use

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

I'm surprised Dolby hasn't enacted a request for mixers to encode films with the five front channels with discrete sound sourcing, since it's mentioned in Dolby literature that adding a Left Center and Right center speakers is recommended for these newer larger (and wider screens) where filing in the missing gaps is key to panning sound more effectively. This is actually also integrated into standard DCI compliant audio processing - adding the additional channels and [hint, hint] archiving pre-1979 70mm/6-track (and 8-channel SDDS) films that used five front sound would be most ideal.

SDDS 8-channel wasn't very popular. There weren't that many films and frankly, when I did see SDDS 8 films at an SDDS 8 theatre, I really could not discern the extra channels. I was always paranoid that they released an 8-channel version for marketing purposes, but no one ever bothered to actually mix to those extra channels.

One of the reasons Dolby developed the 70mm baby-boom format for Star Wars in 1977, where the front left-center and right-center channels were only low frequency is because only a few 70mm films actually used five discrete front channels. Most of them simply used the four-track mix and then combined left and center for the left-center channel and center and right for the right-center channel. "Lord Jim" was mixed 3-track (LCR). "2001: A Space Odyssey" was mixed 4-track except for the last sequence. Also, in early use of 6-track 70mm mag, they did indeed pan dialog, but that is never done today.

While there are theaters today with larger screens, the theaters themselves are not as large as the big theaters that played 70mm films decades ago, before the age of the multiplex. In big cities, most 70mm theaters seated at least 1000 people and that's if they had already been twinned. Back in the roadshow days, there were many theaters with 2000 or more seats, even in local neighborhoods. Those theaters were large enough to need the extra coverage. At one time, there were 139 theaters in the United States with more than 2800 seats with the median at 3218. 29 of those theaters (21%) were in NYC.

I do believe that those two extra front channels are optional for Atmos, but I think they're only available for objects. One other aspect of Atmos in the theatre to improve pans is the addition of front surround channels - surrounds that are closer to the front so that when a pan moves from the front to the surrounds, it sounds smoother. Also, there are rear woofers for the surrounds so that there's a better timbre match between the fronts and the surrounds.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Dubstar

since SDDS has been mentioned - I'm surprised Dolby hasn't enacted a request for mixers to encode films with the five front channels with discrete sound sourcing, since it's mentioned in Dolby literature that adding a Left Center and Right center speakers is recommended for these newer larger (and wider screens) where filing in the missing gaps is key to panning sound more effectively. This is actually also integrated into standard DCI compliant audio processing - adding the additional channels and [hint, hint] archiving pre-1979 70mm/6-track (and 8-channel SDDS) films that used five front sound would be most ideal.

Atmos can treat dialog like any other object. The dialog of Into Darkness was mixed this way. Clear as a bell and the voices of the characters were anchored firmly to their screen location.


I just saw Transformers: Age of Extinction and the dialog in this one was all center based and at times hard to understand (it's very low in the soundtrack). So it all depends on the mix because this was the same premium theater I saw STID (& Godzilla and Brave).
EDIT: I forgot to mention this film was not mixed at Skywalker like the other Transformers so I'm wondering if that had anything to do with it.


Speaking of T:AoE I'm betting it will be in Atmos on Blu-ray since Bay apparently supervises the Dolby TrueHD encodes of his films.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I do believe that those two extra front channels are optional for Atmos, but I think they're only available for objects. One other aspect of Atmos in the theatre to improve pans is the addition of front surround channels - surrounds that are closer to the front so that when a pan moves from the front to the surrounds, it sounds smoother. Also, there are rear woofers for the surrounds so that there's a better timbre match between the fronts and the surrounds.

All speakers are potentially full range with Atmos, not just the surrounds.


As I said in the post above, dialog panning is treated as an object so characters can speak from precise locations. The sound mixers at Skywalker for Brave talked about a sequence when Merida is talking with her mother, her mother is above her so they actually positioned her voice to "talk down" to Merida. It was a very subtle effect in the theater but it worked.

[Dubstar]

Pixar is one of the only few studios where the sound mixers can and do mix with directionalized dialogue placed not only in the center, but also in the left and right, and the sweet spots in between the front channel speakers (check out the bluray of Toy Story 2) - yes, it's rare, but when done well (and correctly) it creates for unique sound.

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

SDDS 8-channel wasn't very popular. There weren't that many films and frankly, when I did see SDDS 8 films at an SDDS 8 theatre, I really could not discern the extra channels. I was always paranoid that they released an 8-channel version for marketing purposes, but no one ever bothered to actually mix to those extra channels.

One of the reasons Dolby developed the 70mm baby-boom format for Star Wars in 1977, where the front left-center and right-center channels were only low frequency is because only a few 70mm films actually used five discrete front channels. Most of them simply used the four-track mix and then combined left and center for the left-center channel and center and right for the right-center channel. "Lord Jim" was mixed 3-track (LCR). "2001: A Space Odyssey" was mixed 4-track except for the last sequence. Also, in early use of 6-track 70mm mag, they did indeed pan dialog, but that is never done today.

While there are theaters today with larger screens, the theaters themselves are not as large as the big theaters that played 70mm films decades ago, before the age of the multiplex. In big cities, most 70mm theaters seated at least 1000 people and that's if they had already been twinned. Back in the roadshow days, there were many theaters with 2000 or more seats, even in local neighborhoods. Those theaters were large enough to need the extra coverage. At one time, there were 139 theaters in the United States with more than 2800 seats with the median at 3218. 29 of those theaters (21%) were in NYC.

I do believe that those two extra front channels are optional for Atmos, but I think they're only available for objects. One other aspect of Atmos in the theatre to improve pans is the addition of front surround channels - surrounds that are closer to the front so that when a pan moves from the front to the surrounds, it sounds smoother. Also, there are rear woofers for the surrounds so that there's a better timbre match between the fronts and the surrounds.

optional and 'recommended' is what I've read and interpret from Dolby specs on the subject.

detailed in this pdf from Dolby, first one in google search:

Dolby Atmos Specifications Issue 2 - Google

over 100+ films were mixed and released in 8-SDDS from 1993 to 2007 - sure it's niche but I wouldn't say it was unpopular.

sure directionalized dialog is rare, but music really benefits from the extra channels - 'Immortal Beloved', 'Sense and Sensibility' 'Heavy Metal', 'Interview with the Vampire' created an impressive wall of sound, for 'Sense' it expanded the outdoor scenes with subtle magnificence. Even the restored 6-track mix of 'West Side Story' (70mm print) gave the illusion that the orchestra was literally there 'live' behind the screen.

and even the resurgence of 8-channel mixing came full circle in the Star Wars universe for 'The Phantom Menace' under Gary Rydstrom's direction and creativity.

'Star Wars: Episode I:The Phantom Menace' To Be Released In 8-Channel SDDS

all I'm saying is that if Dolby is instigating and advocating five front channels - there's really no reason NOT to be mixing using the additional discrete sound sources for the overall theatrical experience.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Auro is not better than Atmos because Auro just adds more channels. It's not object oriented and therefore, it still uses the old model of sending audio to channels, not to locations. When Dolby did its research for the theatrical market, it decided that just adding a few more channels wasn't enough of a benefit.

As part of the calibration process (and I assume that this will need to be included with any Dolby Atmos home receiver), you run test tones so that the Atmos processor understands where the speaker locations are. Then, in live time, when it "sees" an audio object, it sends it to the speaker location closest to where it's intended. This is why theaters can implement Atmos with a variety of speaker configurations. The more speakers you have, the more accurate and distinct the location. Having said that, if your room is relatively small and the speakers are spaced closely together, I don't believe it's going to provide much distinction.

Unless you have a very strangely shaped room, you can't have a wide that's wider than the surrounds or the overhead channels, so I don't see the point of the wide channels - they were really just matrixed gimmicks for those people who wanted "more" channels. While in 11.1, they're not matrixed, they're not quite as effective. As just one example, from what I've read, people who saw Gravity in both IMAX and Atmos preferred the audio on the Atmos version.

Having said all that and even though I really like Atmos theatrically, with the possible exception of those Wall Street bonus babies who have a $million home theatre, there aren't actually that many consumers who even have 5.1 in the home, never mind 7.1, 9.1, 11.1 or the up to 64 channels that Atmos can provide in the theatre (I'm still unclear as to how many channels Atmos can provide in the home). Most consumers, if they have anything at all besides the TV's own speakers, have a sound bar. IMO, this is going to be a very limited market.

One other note: once you start adding lots of additional speakers, it's not going to be very practical if they have to be hardwired. If Atmos and systems like it are going to succeed beyond the Pioneer implementation (of simply adding upward facing speakers to the tops of the front and rear speakers), I believe the system has to move to wireless active speakers for all the extra channels.

Eventually there probably will be chips that handle both Atmos and Auro and you'll be able to choose. It looks to me like the 2014 implementations have been rushed (especially since they won't be available until the end of the year). I think 2015 will be a better year to start looking at these systems. Meanwhile, there's no content yet anyway.

I certainly see your point and I love Atmos myself, but I guess I'm just a victim of studio trying to sell me a product. Check it out yourself:

http://www.barco.com/en/Auro11-1/~/media/48FD91C7F9574A4280E49AA8C4CCA90E.ashx

And this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RjP-TDMxjA

Basically, they both say how it's pointless to have speakers on the ceiling because we don't have ears on our heads.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Poya

Basically, they both say how it's pointless to have speakers on the ceiling because we don't have ears on our heads.

Well, I don't know about you but my ears are certainly on my head.


In any case I certainly can localize sound above me. I don't have an ear in the back of my head and I can hear things in back of me. I don't have ears on my face but hear sounds in front of me. It's a ridiculous argument to explain the shortcomings of their system vs. a superior competitor.


Atmos has 2 rows of speakers above the listener, and sounds can be panned left-to right and back and forth, all above you.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Well, I don't know about you but my ears are certainly on my head.


In any case I certainly can localize sound above me. [b]I don't have an ear in the back of my head and I can hear things in back of me. I don't have ears on my face but hear sounds in front of me. It's a ridiculous argument to explain the shortcomings of their system vs. a superior competitor.


Atmos has 2 rows of speakers above the listener, and sounds can be panned left-to right and back and forth, all above you.

That's true. I'll be waiting for the Marantz 8802. That sounds like the kind of receiver tailored to me. 13.2 channels!

[Dubstar]

Originally Posted by Poya

I certainly see your point and I love Atmos myself, but I guess I'm just a victim of studio trying to sell me a product. Check it out yourself:

http://www.barco.com/en/Auro11-1/~/media/48FD91C7F9574A4280E49AA8C4CCA90E.ashx

And this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RjP-TDMxjA

Basically, they both say how it's pointless to have speakers on the ceiling because we don't have ears on our heads.

the video mentions a number of 'albums' mixed in Auro - really? that's news to me - what are those titles?

[Lentulus Batiatus]

Hre's the question I have.... Right now I'd say 96% of blu-rays (with HD audio) have dtsHD-MA tracks, not DolbyTrueHD. How many studious are going to drop dts and switch to Dolby to be able to include Atmos? Or is dts working on their version that's basically the same thing just their brand?

Case in point - Everyone is sighting Gravity as a Dolby Atmos example, yet the BD has dts.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Hre's the question I have.... Right now I'd say 96% of blu-rays (with HD audio) have dtsHD-MA tracks, not DolbyTrueHD. How many studious are going to drop dts and switch to Dolby to be able to include Atmos? Or is dts working on their version that's basically the same thing just their brand?

Same way they dropped Dolby for DTS a few years ago.

[Lentulus Batiatus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Same way they dropped Dolby for DTS a few years ago.

See my updated post.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Hre's the question I have.... Right now I'd say 96% of blu-rays (with HD audio) have dtsHD-MA tracks, not DolbyTrueHD. How many studious are going to drop dts and switch to Dolby to be able to include Atmos? Or is dts working on their version that's basically the same thing just their brand?

Many studios' home video divisions switch back and forth from Dolby to DTS on Blu-ray for whatever reason. If they like DTS-UHD better (or like the fact it's open source), and it is released to consumer receiver and pre-amp products... then it may be that Atmos will fade and DTS-UHD will emerge.

Who knows at this stage? It's only just beginning.

[slimdude]

Originally Posted by Lentulus Batiatus

Hre's the question I have.... Right now I'd say 96% of blu-rays (with HD audio) have dtsHD-MA tracks, not DolbyTrueHD. How many studious are going to drop dts and switch to Dolby to be able to include Atmos? Or is dts working on their version that's basically the same thing just their brand?

Case in point - Everyone is sighting Gravity as a Dolby Atmos example, yet the BD has dts.

Warner Brothers, will have to re-release: Gravity, (and all other blu-rays movies that were featured in Dolby Atmos theatrically), with a new Dolby Atmos soundtrack on blu-ray, if they choose to.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by slimdude

Warner Brothers, will have to re-release: Gravity, (and all other blu-rays movies that were featured in Dolby Atmos theatrically), with a new Dolby Atmos soundtrack on blu-ray.

I would bet that Gravity is indeed one of the first Atmos enabled Blu-ray discs.

It was awfully suspicious when WB dropped a bunch of features off the disc and only released it in 5.1 given just how aggressive the Atmos mix was. And it was even a Dolby 7.1 movie theatrically too.

The same goes with Disney's Frozen. It was released almost bare bones (they even made fun of that fact in a snippet on the current Blu-ray) and they eliminated the 3D version from their lineup.

That seems like no mere coincidence given the timing of Dolby's Atmos announcement.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Atmos can treat dialog like any other object. The dialog of Into Darkness was mixed this way. Clear as a bell and the voices of the characters were anchored firmly to their screen location.


I just saw Transformers: Age of Extinction and the dialog in this one was all center based and at times hard to understand (it's very low in the soundtrack). So it all depends on the mix because this was the same premium theater I saw STID (& Godzilla and Brave).
EDIT: I forgot to mention this film was not mixed at Skywalker like the other Transformers so I'm wondering if that had anything to do with it.


Speaking of T:AoE I'm betting it will be in Atmos on Blu-ray since Bay apparently supervises the Dolby TrueHD encodes of his films.

Though I loathe Transformers with a passion, I'm sorry to hear that the sound mixers didn't utilize Atmos' tools as well as they could have.

Gravity had an amazing amount of dialog that tracked with the location of the actors on and off screen. And it worked brilliantly... I find center speaker-locked dialog to be quite unrealistic. When done correctly, directionalized dialog is far superior.

[KubrickKurasawa]

Originally Posted by Jbug

You should get out more often. There are options for adding extra speakers or even no additional speakers.

http://dolbyatmos.onkyousa.com/

Who is creating content, such as movies, for Dolby Atmos in the home?

Globally, more than 100 cinema blockbusters have been released featuring Dolby Atmos soundtracks in the past two years, and many more are on the way. Major Hollywood studios are partnering with Dolby to create home video versions of both current box office releases and previously released favorites for release in 2014.

That's nice and all but after reviewing your post and another person I wonder why in the heck don't these companies like Onkyo instead of 5.1.4 and 7.1.4 go with what I would want if I upgraded from my 5.1 THX certified set and upgrade to 7.1.7 as in the 7 is just top speakers projecting sound upwards for the 1center, 2fl, 3fr, 4ml,5mr,6bl,7br. That way folks don't have to mount to their ceiling joists/studs, and also don't have to worry about wires up that high?

Seems like this is a rushed product idea if you ask me. Rushed usually equals sloppy from my experience as well. Good luck though, but I would personally not buy a 5.1.2, 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 or 7.1.4 Onkyo receiver when in my mind a 7.1.7 would be the correct upgrade for average Home Theater enthusiasts with a current 5.1 set. Just my opinion though people can and will do whatever they want.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

I would bet that Gravity is indeed one of the first Atmos enabled Blu-ray discs.

It was awfully suspicious when WB dropped a bunch of features off the disc and only released it in 5.1 given just how aggressive the Atmos mix was. And it was even a Dolby 7.1 movie theatrically too.

The same goes with Disney's Frozen. It was released almost bare bones (they even made fun of that fact in a snippet on the current Blu-ray) and they eliminated the 3D version from their lineup.

That seems like no mere coincidence given the timing of Dolby's Atmos announcement.

Disney isn't releasing Frozen on 3D Blu Ray because it didn't do well on its initial theatrical run and most saw the 2D. Same reason whi Need For Speed isn't getting a 3D BD here.

[FilmFreakosaurus]

Originally Posted by KubrickKurasawa

That's nice and all but after reviewing your post and another person I wonder why in the heck don't these companies like Onkyo instead of 5.1.4 and 7.1.4 go with what I would want if I upgraded from my 5.1 THX certified set and upgrade to 7.1.7 as in the 7 is just top speakers projecting sound upwards for the 1center, 2fl, 3fr, 4ml,5mr,6bl,7br. That way folks don't have to mount to their ceiling joists/studs, and also don't have to worry about wires up that high?

Seems like this is a rushed product idea if you ask me. Rushed usually equals sloppy from my experience as well. Good luck though, but I would personally not buy a 5.1.2, 5.1.4 or 7.1.2 or 7.1.4 Onkyo receiver when in my mind a 7.1.7 would be the correct upgrade for average Home Theater enthusiasts with a current 5.1 set. Just my opinion though people can and will do whatever they want.

You'll have to see what flavors of Atmos will be made available in the coming year or so. Dolby says that a company is working on a product that outputs the bulk of consumer Atmos' 24 mains + 10 overhead capability.

So, 7.1.7 isn't out of the realm of possibilities of future supported layouts.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by FilmFreakosaurus

Many studios' home video divisions switch back and forth from Dolby to DTS on Blu-ray for whatever reason. If they like DTS-UHD better (or like the fact it's open source), and it is released to consumer receiver and pre-amp products... then it may be that Atmos will fade and DTS-UHD will emerge.

Who knows at this stage? It's only just beginning.

DTS-MA took a year and a half after Blu-ray launched before a decoding solution was in place. Blu-ray is a mature format now, so the studios aren't going to sit while they d*** around and make promises for things that "eventually" make the market.


Open source means nothing if they can't get support for the tools. Look at the market position of Linux in the home compared to Windows and Apple. Neo-X has almost no traction. There's been more demo discs in Atmos than there are actual Neo-X releases!