[zdjh22]

A very interesting interview with Steven Wilson about Atmos mixes. He talks about binaural rendering of Atmos for headphone listening (starting at about 7:35 in the video, but it’ll be almost a minute before he mentions headphones). This is a musician who needs an A16! I realize that Apple/Dolby binaural is a huge thing, but when he says “obviously not as good as a full speaker setup” I just had to chuckle.

A video interview with Steven Wilson about Dolby Atmos

 

[esimms86]

A very interesting interview with Steven Wilson about Atmos mixes. He talks about binaural rendering of Atmos for headphone listening (starting at about 7:35 in the video, but it’ll be almost a minute before he mentions headphones). This is a musician who needs an A16! I realize that Apple/Dolby binaural is a huge thing, but when he says “obviously not as good as a full speaker setup” I just had to chuckle.

A video interview with Steven Wilson about Dolby Atmos

Yes, I listened to the interview as well. The way I view it, listening to Dolby Atmos mixes via AirPods is akin to what artists did back in the day. They would put stereo mixes on a cassette tape and then play them back in their cars. This way, they would hear the music the same way that the majority of listeners heard it. There has to be significantly more people listening to Dolby Atmos via headphones compared to people listening via physical surround sound systems. And, even then, I would expect that sound bars probably account for the majority of non headphone based Dolby Atmos systems. The A16 has to be its own special niche within a niche within a niche.

BTW, how cool would it be if the Smyths were to work with Steven Wilson to provide him with a virtual mixing station based on the A16?

 

[zdjh22]

Yes, I listened to the interview as well. The way I view it, listening to Dolby Atmos mixes via AirPods is akin to what artists did back in the day. They would put stereo mixes on a cassette tape and then play them back in their cars. This way, they would hear the music the same way that the majority of listeners heard it. There has to be significantly more people listening to Dolby Atmos via headphones compared to people listening via physical surround sound systems. And, even then, I would expect that sound bars probably account for the majority of non headphone based Dolby Atmos systems. The A16 has to be its own special niche within a niche within a niche.

BTW, how cool would it be if the Smyths were to work with Steven Wilson to provide him with a virtual mixing station based on the A16?

I had a long interaction on QQ that carried over to PMs with an audio engineer who does a lot of mixing for clients whose music ends up on Apple Music. He was very enthusiastic about the A16, particularly after he tried the 3DSS PRIR samples I pointed him to. He really wants a mixing solution that he can use on the road away from his studio.

In the end an A16 won’t work out, because he just can’t duplicate for listening to his mixes the sound that his customers and their listeners will experience on Apple AirPods out of Apple Music. There’s a lot more to it than just that; mixers face an unusual set of obstacles that affect how the music evolves from the DAW all of the way through the Dolby/Apple ecosystem onto Apple Music and out to AirPods. Dolby and Apple binaural rendering are different (I gather), which also causes more general issues. He also found that when listening to recorded binaural renderings from an A16, the music sounded great on conventional headphones, but awful on AirPods with noise cancellation enabled. Perhaps the phase shifting inherent to noise cancellation technologies also messes up phasing on the binaural mixes. I’d be curious to hear whether any A16 user has tried NC headphones on their rig, but I would not be surprised if none ever have.

I quickly found on QQ that “binaural render” is a very loaded term. It seems counterintuitive that a good binaural render is not judged by how accurately it reproduces a listening room. It seems to be taken as a truism that a binaural render will always be substantially different than the reproduction of a physical room. I still have faith that an A16 could eventually be replicated entirely in software - Virtuoso comes close, and it sounds like Impulcifer can come close - but it’s not clear how many years that will take. Also, a big obstacle to a software-only approach is the closed nature of the ecosystem (Dolby Atmos, for example). That APM decoder board in our A16’s really holds most of the keys to the kingdom.

 

[GeorgeA]

A very interesting interview with Steven Wilson about Atmos mixes. He talks about binaural rendering of Atmos for headphone listening (starting at about 7:35 in the video, but it’ll be almost a minute before he mentions headphones). This is a musician who needs an A16! I realize that Apple/Dolby binaural is a huge thing, but when he says “obviously not as good as a full speaker setup” I just had to chuckle.

A video interview with Steven Wilson about Dolby Atmos

I’d like to add that there’s also a not so long-ago interview with Steven Wilson on immersive audio at stereophile page.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/steven-wilson-master-immersive-music

In that interview, Steven Wilson also talked about the Dolby binaural algorithm, which he thought was going to prevail for those who could not listen to an Atmos mix through a dedicated speaker setup.

 

[mei09891]

1. Recently my head tracker(HT) did not start working vertical sensing except horizontal right after A16 boot up as usual (previously the HT start working immediately), but now takes at least 5 minutes for the vertical sensor to start working. Is it normal?

2. I have been thinking about that the only thing hinders most of the people from experiencing A16's maximum performance is too hard to find an available and satisfactory personal HRTF measurement service around. Either don't have the dedicated room, don't have the time or knowledge to do so, don't have personal favorite AV system, or too far away from available service. But what if I can obtain my own head's 3D module with CT scan or some smartphone LIDAR scan app such as scaniverse to scan and export the file. Then I can send the file to 3D-print farm in the country where the HRTF measure service provided to reconstruct the module as a dummy head for HRTF measure purpose. If it works, then maybe there will be more interested people get involved.

 

[Litlgi74]

1. Recently my head tracker(HT) did not start working vertical sensing except horizontal right after A16 boot up as usual (previously the HT start working immediately), but now takes at least 5 minutes for the vertical sensor to start working. Is it normal?

From the manual...

Immediately after connection, the LED on the head-top will momentarily turn RED while it checks the validity of the internal head-tracking program. A few seconds later it will flash 10 times in quick succession. Ten green flashes imply all is well. Ten red flashes imply the system has lost its calibration data. In this case the head tracker must be recalibrated as described in Appendix G. Following ten green flashes, the LED will turn red while it warms up. Warmup will typically take around 10-15 minutes. It is important that head tracker remain stationary during this time. The LED will turn steady green once the temperature has stabilised.

 

[Sanctuary]

Sometimes I buy discs of simply "OK" films if they have a great audio mix, and the year isn't even half finished , and I think I've found the Atmos mix to beat for a film that hasn't even released on disc yet.

Been waiting for Civil War to hit 4K, and the UHD releases in July, but it hit streaming so I decided to go ahead and check it out. Normally I really don't like the sound quality of a streamed Atmos mix, and while I was hoping the film itself would have a good mix, I wasn't expecting much from the actual dynamics of the streamed version.

I can't believe how much my expectations were blown away. While it's quite obvious it's streaming, it's actually "fine" even factoring in the compression. It's not something I'd use as a reference, but it wasn't awful or anything like streaming can sometimes (usually) be. What blew me away was the actual object mix itself. It has one of the most immersive tracks I've ever heard, and unlike many mixes that can get really busy to the point of sounding congested, this mix can get really busy, yet everything is still easy to pinpoint.

I've had a problem in the past with many action heavy films when listening to them with the A16 where quite often it seems like I'll hear objects above me, or in a position that doesn't sound quite right, or how the mix just doesn't have any room to breathe the more speakers are firing at once. Not so with this film.

It has plenty of ambient, low intensity scenes that sound like realistic environments, and then whenever the action starts, you actually feel like you're on the ground floor with the characters. It also has some of the most realistic use of tops/heights I've yet heard as well.

Just finished watching this, and I can't wait to watch it again in July.

For comparisons, think: Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, Blackhawk Down, Ambulance, Unbroken, Blade Runner 2049, Gravity and The Batman.

edit: BTW, if you never managed to get the Gravity Diamond Luxe edition (it's the special version with Atmos), they are now back on Amazon. They re-released the film on May 14th and even though it doesn't say "Diamond Luxe" on the packaging, it has the same cover and the same Atmos mix that was on that disc. There have been "other" ways to get this film for a while now, but for the purists out there, you can now buy this film without spending hundreds of dollars.

It's been verified by many people that have already purchased it as having the Atmos mix.

A very interesting interview with Steven Wilson about Atmos mixes. He talks about binaural rendering of Atmos for headphone listening (starting at about 7:35 in the video, but it’ll be almost a minute before he mentions headphones). This is a musician who needs an A16! I realize that Apple/Dolby binaural is a huge thing, but when he says “obviously not as good as a full speaker setup” I just had to chuckle.

A video interview with Steven Wilson about Dolby Atmos

He's not wrong. A full speaker setup still sounds better than what the A16 can do. Hell, I often find a real 5.1 speaker setup more pleasing than a 12.1.10 virtual setup. You just can't replicate the same sense of space over headphones. Does it sound good, or "good enough" to be engrossing? Yes, but every single time I go over to a friend's house and watch something with my old home theater setup, I can't help but think how the A16 doesn't sound as open. Largely I assume due to a lack of accurate crossfeed.

In the real world though, most people either don't have the space, or possibly desire (or are met with wife factor resistance) to place 16+ speakers. Both have their benefits, but if I had the choice between using an A16 and having a space for a real 7.1.4 speaker setup that I could blast at any hour, I know which I'd pick every time.

It is kind of funny though, and I do agree that he needs to hear the A16, because he's comparing speakers to substandard "Atmos" emulators. Stephen Smyth wasn't wrong when he said it isn't as good as speakers, but that it's as close as you can get over headphones, and to get the most out of it, you need a PRIR. Whenever someone mentions how good this or that device (usually earbuds, headsets or apps) sounds with its "Atmos" capabilities, that gets a chuckle from me. But hey, if someone thinks something sounds good, more power to them.

 

[esimms86]

Sometimes I buy discs of simply "OK" films if they have a great audio mix, and the year isn't even half finished , and I think I've found the Atmos mix to beat for a film that hasn't even released on disc yet.

Been waiting for Civil War to hit 4K, and the UHD releases in July, but it hit streaming so I decided to go ahead and check it out. Normally I really don't like the sound quality of a streamed Atmos mix, and while I was hoping the film itself would have a good mix, I wasn't expecting much from the actual dynamics of the streamed version.

I can't believe how much my expectations were blown away. While it's quite obvious it's streaming, it's actually "fine" even factoring in the compression. It's not something I'd use as a reference, but it wasn't awful or anything like streaming can sometimes (usually) be. What blew me away was the actual object mix itself. It has one of the most immersive tracks I've ever heard, and unlike many mixes that can get really busy to the point of sounding congested, this mix can get really busy, yet everything is still easy to pinpoint.

I've had a problem in the past with many action heavy films when listening to them with the A16 where quite often it seems like I'll hear objects above me, or in a position that doesn't sound quite right, or how the mix just doesn't have any room to breathe the more speakers are firing at once. Not so with this film.

It has plenty of ambient, low intensity scenes that sound like realistic environments, and then whenever the action starts, you actually feel like you're on the ground floor with the characters. It also has some of the most realistic use of tops/heights I've yet heard as well.

Just finished watching this, and I can't wait to watch it again in July.

For comparisons, think: Saving Private Ryan, All Quiet on the Western Front, Blackhawk Down, Ambulance, Unbroken, Blade Runner 2049, Gravity and The Batman.

edit: BTW, if you never managed to get the Gravity Diamond Luxe edition (it's the special version with Atmos), they are now back on Amazon. They re-released the film on May 14th and even though it doesn't say "Diamond Luxe" on the packaging, it has the same cover and the same Atmos mix that was on that disc. There have been "other" ways to get this film for a while now, but for the purists out there, you can now buy this film without spending hundreds of dollars.

It's been verified by many people that have already purchased it as having the Atmos mix.


He's not wrong. A full speaker setup still sounds better than what the A16 can do. Hell, I often find a real 5.1 speaker setup more pleasing than a 12.1.10 virtual setup. You just can't replicate the same sense of space over headphones. Does it sound good, or "good enough" to be engrossing? Yes, but every single time I go over to a friend's house and watch something with my old home theater setup, I can't help but think how the A16 doesn't sound as open. Largely I assume due to a lack of accurate crossfeed.

In the real world though, most people either don't have the space, or possibly desire (or are met with wife factor resistance) to place 16+ speakers. Both have their benefits, but if I had the choice between using an A16 and having a space for a real 7.1.4 speaker setup that I could blast at any hour, I know which I'd pick every time.

It is kind of funny though, and I do agree that he needs to hear the A16, because he's comparing speakers to substandard "Atmos" emulators. Stephen Smyth wasn't wrong when he said it isn't as good as speakers, but that it's as close as you can get over headphones, and to get the most out of it, you need a PRIR. Whenever someone mentions how good this or that device (usually earbuds, headsets or apps) sounds with its "Atmos" capabilities, that gets a chuckle from me. But hey, if someone thinks something sounds good, more power to them.

Well, keep in mind just how relatively rare it is for someone to be even aware of what an A16 (or A8) is, let alone how few people have actually ever experienced one. Heck, most people have never experienced Dolby Atmos through an AirPod Pro.

 

[Sanctuary]

Well, keep in mind just how relatively rare it is for someone to be even aware of what an A16 (or A8) is, let alone how few people have actually ever experienced one. Heck, most people have never experienced Dolby Atmos through an AirPod Pro.

That's fine, but it doesn't take much to actually broaden your horizons. Virtualization over headphones isn't new and for about fifteen years now people have had plenty of opportunities to sample even 5.1 and 7.1 over headphones from multiple different sources and compare that to the real thing (longer if we count Aureal 3D on PC). I just found it somewhat ironic that Steven Wilson was using some damn earbuds as his baseline for binaural audio when he has access to so many more options than most here with not just speakers, but all kinds of virtualization technologies. It's very, very hard for me to believe that he's not at least heard about the A8 or A16 considering how much he's into mixing Atmos now.

I mean, he even says that the binaural mixes to him sound around a 50% representation of what you would hear with real speakers. Even after I agreed with him that real speakers are still better than binaural, it's just funny that he's clearly leaving the A16 out, if he's even used one yet, because I'd wager it's closer to 85%.

Then again, he could have also just been talking about things the average person might have access to, and the whole Airpod comment was simply in reference to how mixing is done now because he knows most are going to be listening to Atmos with something like that, or as he said a sound bar, and he just wants to hear how his mix would sound to the little people.

 

[esimms86]

That's fine, but it doesn't take much to actually broaden your horizons. Virtualization over headphones isn't new and for about fifteen years now people have had plenty of opportunities to sample even 5.1 and 7.1 over headphones from multiple different sources and compare that to the real thing (longer if we count Aureal 3D on PC). I just found it somewhat ironic that Steven Wilson was using some damn earbuds as his baseline for binaural audio when he has access to so many more options than most here with not just speakers, but all kinds of virtualization technologies. It's very, very hard for me to believe that he's not at least heard about the A8 or A16 considering how much he's into mixing Atmos now.

I mean, he even says that the binaural mixes to him sound around a 50% representation of what you would hear with real speakers. Even after I agreed with him that real speakers are still better than binaural, it's just funny that he's clearly leaving the A16 out, if he's even used one yet, because I'd wager it's closer to 85%.

Then again, he could have also just been talking about things the average person might have access to, and the whole Airpod comment was simply in reference to how mixing is done now because he knows most are going to be listening to Atmos with something like that, or as he said a sound bar, and he just wants to hear how his mix would sound to the little people.

You and I are extremely rare(and fortunate) in having had the experience of John at 3D Soundshop actually make us our very own in person PRIR. No doubt, you know just how lucky you are(I certainly do!).

I believe that your last paragraph best explains why Steven Wilson probably went with the AirPod for a more consumer standard comparable Dolby Atmos experience.

 

[esimms86]

Steven Wilson’s Dolby Atmos mixing studio. Picture is from 2020.

 

[Litlgi74]

Steven Wilson’s Dolby Atmos mixing studio. Picture is from 2020.

Definitely not what I expected.

 

[Sanctuary]

You and I are extremely rare(and fortunate) in having had the experience of John at 3D Soundshop actually make us our very own in person PRIR. No doubt, you know just how lucky you are(I certainly do!).

Oh, you better believe I do.

 

[zdjh22]

He's not wrong. A full speaker setup still sounds better than what the A16 can do. Hell, I often find a real 5.1 speaker setup more pleasing than a 12.1.10 virtual setup. You just can't replicate the same sense of space over headphones. Does it sound good, or "good enough" to be engrossing? Yes, but every single time I go over to a friend's house and watch something with my old home theater setup, I can't help but think how the A16 doesn't sound as open. Largely I assume due to a lack of accurate crossfeed.

In the real world though, most people either don't have the space, or possibly desire (or are met with wife factor resistance) to place 16+ speakers. Both have their benefits, but if I had the choice between using an A16 and having a space for a real 7.1.4 speaker setup that I could blast at any hour, I know which I'd pick every time.

It is kind of funny though, and I do agree that he needs to hear the A16, because he's comparing speakers to substandard "Atmos" emulators. Stephen Smyth wasn't wrong when he said it isn't as good as speakers, but that it's as close as you can get over headphones, and to get the most out of it, you need a PRIR. Whenever someone mentions how good this or that device (usually earbuds, headsets or apps) sounds with its "Atmos" capabilities, that gets a chuckle from me. But hey, if someone thinks something sounds good, more power to them.

In particular, he said that he had never heard his 10 Atmos selections before on anything like the massive speaker setup at the demo, and that not only that surround setup wouldn’t translate to a home, but that a big stereo layout at those shows similarly wouldn’t translate. Until I hear his opinion of A16 listening, I’m going to optimistically say he would find physical vs A16 to be amazingly close for, shall we say, more conventional speaker systems.

I’m of the opinion that excluding lower frequencies, so using say 400-14000 Hz, an A16 with a measured PRIR is capable of replicating the sound field as measured at the surface of your auditory canals using the in-ear mics, for a speaker count up to the channel limit. My home theatre started decades ago as simply Dolby surround (two rears) and evolved eventually to 7.1.2. With my own PRIR, seated at the MLP, other than lower frequencies I cannot distinguish between my physical speakers and an A16 sound room built with my PRIR. For me 5.1 sounds the same physical or via the A16. Not 85% as good, the same. Atmos is better on the A16 because I’ve measured additional virtual speaker positions, and I mix in from other PRIRs (like from 3DSS). So I can experience virtual layouts that I cannot experience physically.

From both the photo of Wilson’s mixing room, and Neil Young’s Atmos mixing studio that I was lucky to see in a live Zoom Patreon call, there doesn’t appear to be anything in either that an A16 can’t measure and replicate.

I have very little Atmos music that fully excites a 12.1.10 virtual room. Baba O’Reilly, mixed by Wilson, is one, and frankly I don’t like it - it’s much much better at 9.1.6 (the synth panning over the overheads at the beginning is annoying). 40 Years of Major Tom, OTOH, is very very good.

I don’t suppose you’ve taken your A16 to your friend’s theatre and measured a PRIR there? Because if you haven’t, how do you expect your A16 to replicate the same room sound, or if not the room sound, the “openness”? I absolutely love my Omega 96’s, but my own speakers are at anywhere from 110” to 130” from the MLP, and there’s a big open room space behind. So pure Omega 96 listening is never as “open” for me as my own PRIR. I would also venture to guess that other A16 customers would find listening with my PRIR too “open,” too much reverb.

In the other Wilson interview linked above, he uses the phrase “binaural algorithm”. That hits the mark - Dolby and Apple have their distinct preferred HRTF and room layout models, and calculate a binaural mix to that layout. I wouldn’t call what an A16 does with a personal PRIR a binaural algorithm, but rather a binaural render. We don’t have any control dials to turn on the A16 to control this render. On Virtuoso, you can adjust various room parameters and so there is indeed a sort of algorithm used to do the binaural conversion.

One last note - I can’t wait for the November release of “Welcome to the Pleasure Dome” that Wilson hints about. There are a lot of fine upmixes of that album, but a real MCH mix could be awesome. Now if someone could just find the Golden Earring tapes…

 

[esimms86]

In particular, he said that he had never heard his 10 Atmos selections before on anything like the massive speaker setup at the demo, and that not only that surround setup wouldn’t translate to a home, but that a big stereo layout at those shows similarly wouldn’t translate. Until I hear his opinion of A16 listening, I’m going to optimistically say he would find physical vs A16 to be amazingly close for, shall we say, more conventional speaker systems.

I’m of the opinion that excluding lower frequencies, so using say 400-14000 Hz, an A16 with a measured PRIR is capable of replicating the sound field as measured at the surface of your auditory canals using the in-ear mics, for a speaker count up to the channel limit. My home theatre started decades ago as simply Dolby surround (two rears) and evolved eventually to 7.1.2. With my own PRIR, seated at the MLP, other than lower frequencies I cannot distinguish between my physical speakers and an A16 sound room built with my PRIR. For me 5.1 sounds the same physical or via the A16. Not 85% as good, the same. Atmos is better on the A16 because I’ve measured additional virtual speaker positions, and I mix in from other PRIRs (like from 3DSS). So I can experience virtual layouts that I cannot experience physically.

From both the photo of Wilson’s mixing room, and Neil Young’s Atmos mixing studio that I was lucky to see in a live Zoom Patreon call, there doesn’t appear to be anything in either that an A16 can’t measure and replicate.

I have very little Atmos music that fully excites a 12.1.10 virtual room. Baba O’Reilly, mixed by Wilson, is one, and frankly I don’t like it - it’s much much better at 9.1.6 (the synth panning over the overheads at the beginning is annoying). 40 Years of Major Tom, OTOH, is very very good.

I don’t suppose you’ve taken your A16 to your friend’s theatre and measured a PRIR there? Because if you haven’t, how do you expect your A16 to replicate the same room sound, or if not the room sound, the “openness”? I absolutely love my Omega 96’s, but my own speakers are at anywhere from 110” to 130” from the MLP, and there’s a big open room space behind. So pure Omega 96 listening is never as “open” for me as my own PRIR. I would also venture to guess that other A16 customers would find listening with my PRIR too “open,” too much reverb.

In the other Wilson interview linked above, he uses the phrase “binaural algorithm”. That hits the mark - Dolby and Apple have their distinct preferred HRTF and room layout models, and calculate a binaural mix to that layout. I wouldn’t call what an A16 does with a personal PRIR a binaural algorithm, but rather a binaural render. We don’t have any control dials to turn on the A16 to control this render. On Virtuoso, you can adjust various room parameters and so there is indeed a sort of algorithm used to do the binaural conversion.

One last note - I can’t wait for the November release of “Welcome to the Pleasure Dome” that Wilson hints about. There are a lot of fine upmixes of that album, but a real MCH mix could be awesome. Now if someone could just find the Golden Earring tapes…

In the event that you end up purchasing the Omega Pro universal PRIR, I would be very interested in reading your review. Specifically, I wonder if the gap between virtual and in the room low frequencies would significantly narrow for you. Also, with the increased number of measured angles, I wonder how using those measurements would compare with the angles in your actual room.