If I remember correctly (I sometimes don't) there was a discussion at the SONAR forum about fold-back harmonics being mitigated better @48K, with 50-somethingK being optimal. The discussion being about advantages of going higher than 44.1K. I think I remember Anderton being part of that discussion too.

Go!!

In general. Hoping the discussion doesn't veer off course. Of course, if actual frequency analytics apply, fine.

PreAl wroteYey let's get..onto the 44.1 Vs 48Khz debate.

No need to start a debate here. For the topic of this thread (Dolby Atmos) 48kHz is simply mandatory.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

johndoe313 wrote For the topic of this thread (Dolby Atmos) 48kHz is simply mandatory.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Spot on.

VP

Here's a short update: On Thursday, an old (musician) friend visited me and we talked about Dolby Atmos and my setup. First question he asked was: "Why are your ADAT devices Master Clock?". And frankly, I couldn't answer that. I think I had problems connecting the Behringer ADAT with my Presonus Studio 1810 back in the days, and with the ADA8200 as master it worked. When I switched to the RME interface, I no longer questioned this.

Long story short: we quickly changed my setup back to RME interface as master and ADA8200 as slave. Test run: Studio One can now switch all devices "on the fly" between 44.1 and 48kHz. Dolby Atmos demo song can be loaded without my MacBook crashing completely (as happened before). And at least now I can *hear* via headphones what everyone else is talking about.

Setting the RME as a master clock is likely an improvement all by itself. Glad you got things working! Hopefully you'll get a chance to explore what the Atmos panning can do, regardless of whether you're mixing for Atmos or stereo.

Vocalpoint wroteAnd let's be honest - Apple Music (and their minuscule market share) will never be big enough to convince the other 87.5% of total streaming users who use another service

Apple Music is bigger as you think.

Let me quote from THIS site regarding market share 2023:

Spotify dominated the global music subscriber base in Q3 2023 with 31.7% market share.
...
Apple Music (12.6%), Amazon Music (11.1%) and YouTube Music (9.7%) represent the remainder of the leading Western DSP pack. Along with Spotify, these three DSPs represent 65% of the global market ...

Only Tencent is bigger as Apple Music besides Spotify, but Tencent is China only. And their only Western competitor is ... Apple Music



And besides that Tidal is also pushing Dolby Atmos, as Amazon too, though the later should rethink their Atmos support, which is pretty limited so far.

PS: And it's also worth noting, that Spotify heavily invests in Dolby Atmos:
https://www.mixonline.com/recording/ins ... eo-studios
It shouldn't take too long, until Spotify supports HQ Audio and Atmos streaming.

- I love it. I don't have to justify why

- I love what studio one did, best ATMOS implementation on the market! YEAH!! I purchased Dolby ATMOS Composer prior to S1 implementing it because I wanted it. But it wasn't nearly as good as having it integrated.

- I think it will help some studios business. Musicians who want it, might be willing to pay something for it.

- If you don't want to use it, think it's not necessary... Don't use it. Simple. Last I checked (about 5 minutes ago) S1 still supported 44.1K and still supported stereo. It also supports mono. Do what you like and enjoy your music. I certainly will.

Vocalpoint wrote
ATMOS ... in no way does it take something like an original stereo pressing of Steely's Dan's Aja and make it something special.

It might be worth noting, that it's often nearly impossible to "upgrade" old recordings to good Atmos mixes. It depends on the quality of the archives.

It's also worth noting, that many Atmos productions are pure crap, because they are cheap quick upmixes from Stereo to Atmos (even VSTs exist for that), something that is forbidden on Apple Music, but I guess Apple will have a hard time to avoid that.

Long story short ... many Atmos stuff on Apple Music is not worth it, but there are definitely already some Atmos gems available, that are really enjoyable, more than their Stereo version. But it's similar in the Stereo world ... not many productions are real mixing/mastering masterpieces, right?

christianmiekus wrote Apple Music is bigger as you think.

Slice it however you want - 12.6% of a 100% is still 12.6%.

Or put another way - 87.4% of the market is someone else.

VP

My opinion is that it is a technology that works for film when you are listening in a room with speakers around you. Fantastic technology for that reason.

The gaslighting part (of Dolby and Apple) is when they tell you that you get a similar experience on headphones because of "their technology" be it normal headphones or "special headphones", which is a lie since you cannot hear the sound above below or behind you on any type of headphones.

All it is, is a stereo widener with some EQ and a room sound baked into a special panner. This is basic technology that has been available separately in DAWs for decades and just because Dolby and Apple package it as a "groundbreaking new technology" for music does not mean it is something special.

The really slimy part is Apple forcing this onto artists by saying that songs won't make their curated playlists if not in the Apple Spatial format.

All this while 99% of people listen to music on their phone's earphones. Of course, Apple will say you need their "special earphones" since it's another product to sell. It's scandalous to say the least.

edlane1 wroteThe really slimy part is Apple forcing this onto artists by saying that songs won't make their curated playlists if not in the Apple Spatial format.

All this while 99% of people listen to music on their phone's earphones. Of course, Apple will say you need their "special earphones" since it's another product to sell. It's scandalous to say the least.

Nailed it.

VP

Probably this whole discussion is pointless. If consumers like Atmos it will stay. And if they don't then it will go away, plenty of examples from the past for both options. Companies backing Atmos (or alternatives) will try to start a hype, money will be spent, and it may come to naught. For now you can dabble in it with Studio One. And if you don't want to then don't.

But if you want to publish then do it right, especially the 'backwards compatible' part of it. That way you can have your cake and eat it too.

SwitchBack wroteProbably this whole discussion is pointless. If consumers like Atmos it will stay. And if they don't then it will go away, plenty of examples from the past for both options.

There's one wrinkle, though: Atmos is almost certainly here to stay in movie theaters and home theater setup, so it got its foot in the door in a way that formats like SACD couldn't do. The question is what traction it will get with audio-only releases. The jury's still out with that one, despite Apple trying to put its thumb on the scale.

What might happen eventually is that audio will be released in Atmos only, because the playback system can downshift to any format anyway.

I will say, though, it does sound better than stereo. I'll continue releasing both Atmos Binaural and stereo versions of my songs, especially because the Atmos versions get more clicks.

Regarding Apple, remember this: the company spends billions of dollars for original video content for Apple TV. They don't spend one penny on developing original content for Apple Music.

edlane1 wroteThe gaslighting part (of Dolby and Apple) is when they tell you that you get a similar experience on headphones because of "their technology" be it normal headphones or "special headphones", which is a lie since you cannot hear the sound above below or behind you on any type of headphones.

You are obviously talking about something, you never experienced yourself, because first in Dolby Atmos a sound NEVER is located below you and second, with good headphones you can definitely hear the positioning of a sound in the room around you, be it behind, besides or above you. Ok, the experience is not as good as in a Dolby Atmos speaker environment, but it's by far better as Stereo.

edlane1 wroteOf course, Apple will say you need their "special earphones" since it's another product to sell.

And again ... you shouldn't talk about something, you don't know from own experience!

Apple Music has a well documented setting, that allows listening to Atmos with EVERY headphone, no matter which brand. Only downside is, that they don't tell you, that you should use over-ear headphones, because in-ears always have a too small soundstage for the full enjoyment.

christianmiekus wrote You are obviously talking about something, you never experienced yourself, because first in Dolby Atmos a sound NEVER is located below you and second, with good headphones you can definitely hear the positioning of a sound in the room around you, be it behind, besides or above you.

Christian

Easy there with your Apple "ATMOS" user manual.

It is beyond clear - YOU are into Apple, you are clearly into their ATMOS play and that's fine.

However - that does not mean anyone else is, has to be, or even cares about ATMOS or what Apple is doing over there.

Everyone is allowed their opinion - ESPEICALLY in this thread where the question in the title is about as obvious as it gets.

Users should be able to draw their own conclusions (on this "open" forum) about the "hate" (strong word but it is what it is) of ATMOS in the real world. Regardless of their reason.

The OP is not asking "Why the love for ATMOS?" Or for a stem positioning Powerpoint or a lecture on what users think they understand or do not understand about this tech.

And for me - the answer to this thread's question is most definitely not : "Yeah but...look at all the good things..."

That is a different thread that you should consider starting and discuss with fans of ATMOS in here.

VP

DavidMaurand wrote1
What will the 48khz requirement due to already sluggish performance (to say nothing of six months of using Studio One Pro that I have already burned up a 2TB SSD)? This may explain some of the hate.

If switching from 44.1kHz to 48kHz is going to be a problem, it is time to either fix your current system or upgrade it.
Aside from that, the forced 512 samples total block size for Atmos (as opposed to being able to use maximum DP) is potentially going to require a more powerful system. And then, Atmos mixes tend to go with up to 16 speaker channels per channel, which obviously will draw more performance as well. This is not a must, though, it depends on your mix.

DavidMaurand wroteNow you're twisting my words - it's the 48khz that eats up resources. I thought that was clear. Studio One is demonstrably slow - there are meaningful benchmarks out there reinforcing that.

I am curious about the meaningful benchmarks. Can you provide a link?
As most audio benchmarks out there are comparing apples to pears as the person who does the benchmark has no idea how and where buffers are set in most DAWs and what they actually do.
The only benchmarks that I know that are really well done are from DAWBENCH and, using Dawbench sessions, from Pete Kaine from Scan UK - who focuses on comparing CPU models, not DAWs.