As I have read through the above posts it call goes back and forth somewhat comically to me. All immersive is stereo. Everything is stereo. There is nothing else besides stereo. Atmos cannot supercede stereo. Nothing else exists besides stereo. And because there was some debate above about whether anyone dare say 100%, I dare say everyone, i.e., 100% in this thread can only hear stereo, unless there is someone here that insists they have more than two ears, perhaps an extra ear on their back, their elbow or someplace. Stereo means two, as in two ears, two auditory senses. Our ears sense spatially and make other assessments based on milliseconds of timing, and so do are ears/mind assess accuracy, clarity, transparency, etc. that have little to do with the spatial issues Atmos makes a fortune over, or THX, or etc. I agree with the post above about the Oregon symphony: the tech-masters are messing up the natural, acoustic sounds rendered by musicians and their instruments, adding, in my opinion, purposeful distortion and dilution to the real performance. That’s a pity, and even though those on a tech-kick may get some juice out of the aural sensation, it won’t last because it isn’t the creative composition. Next, are the techies going to start calling themselves musicians? I read the article about the techie in Vegas & Santana. When the techie starts getting billed on the Vegas skyline billboards above the musicians-singers, then I may change my opinion. But as long as its the musician-singer I want to hear, then it’s not some techie who’s the maker-creator of music I want messing with my ears. I just want to hear the musician, accurately, reproduced faithfully, in high fidelity. Anything else, to me, is comical.
Immersive Audio and How to Achieve It
100% of music listeners prefer live music to recorded playback, why? A live performance "immerses" you and frees you up to move around the room, the dance floor and still be immersed. The goal posts have moved away from two speakers to an array of speakers all around as well as above you to reproduce the illusion of a LIVE performance. Why, in 2023, would anyone voluntarily use only two speakers to recreate this illusion of a live performance in a large room?
Even the artists themselves are using immersive audio in concert to WOW their audience, why not do it at home:
https://www.mixonline.com/live-sound/venues/on-the-cover-las-vegas-takes-immersive-live-part-1
- ...
- 134 posts total
I said it but way less directly and clearly than you in my post above... Thanks to be right on the target and so concrete to be then understood by all...... There is as i said a precise rigorously defined concept of "immersiveness" in acoustic... I will cite my own post to complement your post :
I will only add that even spatialization as Timbre is constrained and created by our TWO ears/brain, and we can create it in an acoustically controlled room partially without DSP and without measures on our inner ear and pinnae and without HRTF measures, mechanically by modifying the zone pressures distribution in a small room and the balance and timing with incoming reflections.., It cannot be perfect doing so mechanicaklly but this give us an idea about the power of acoustic controls in a room...
«I don’t know what happens when we die, but maybe we go somewhere between 10^18 Hz and 10^43 Hz» Stuart Hameroff
https://twitter.com/StuartHameroff/status/1692253150093422799 |
First of all thanks for your post, very articulate and welcome to the forum. There is nothing else besides stereo. uhhhh, what about the Beatles recording in mono BEFORE the albums were converted to stereo? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_in_Mono I read the article about the techie in Vegas & Santana Thank you. I just want to hear the musician, accurately, reproduced faithfully, in high fidelity. I agree. My first statement in the OP was a preference for live music over a recording. I learned some members prefer a CD over the actual live musician in your listening space, interesting.
|
- 134 posts total