Preamble: In this article, I'll clearly be supportive of multichannel/Atmos music playback for audiophiles. This in no way should be seen as disparaging to those who feel that 2-channel stereo is completely adequate if not optimal for their listening! Simplicity, space considerations, availability of content, budgetary factors, perceived artistic intent, subjective preferences always play into the personal choices we make.
After 25 years of collecting multichannel content since the early days of DVD(-A) and SACD, currently about 15% of the albums on my music server are 3.0+ multichannel. With hopes that this continues to grow, of course!
Every once awhile I'll look over some of the posts I've made over the years to see if there's anything substantial I might revise or provide an addendum for. Most of the time, it's just for historical review to consider my thoughts back then, but sometimes, I'm encouraged to see how nicely things have changed over the ensuing years. Such has been the case for multichannel audio, so I thought I'd make this post as a review and pointer to the topic of multichannel music as an audiophile.
The first time I wrote a post titled "multichannel and the audiophile" was back in 2019, also during the summer - "SUMMER MUSINGS: Multichannel and the audiophile. MCh streaming with a TV Box. And Thoughts on the Future..."
As you know, things have changed since then with the advent of "Spatial" streaming thanks initially to Apple Music's push into the territory, the "chicken or egg" concern I discussed around not having enough multichannel music content has been addressed very nicely. As expected in that 2019 post, streaming came in the form of lossy EAC3 compressed audio. While we didn't quite get the 1+Mbps 7.1 data rate I was thinking about, EAC3-JOC Atmos with 5.1 bed channels at 768kbps is still high bitrate for audio and an excellent-sounding standard that's hard to fault. In my own testing, this bitrate has generally been "perceptually transparent" compared to an equivalent lossless TrueHD-Atmos encode using Dolby's reference Media Encoder (recent version 3.7). I'm sure there are some edge-case killer samples where TrueHD would audibly beat EAC3 (similar to killer samples like jangling keys with higher frequency details or detailed hand claps used in lossy compression testing), but I believe differences would be hard to spot even in volume-controlled blind listening side-by-side with actual music!
Of course, if you have access to the lossless TrueHD-Atmos Blu-ray or download, go grab that over the EAC3 version as a more accurate representation of the intended Atmos presentation potentially with higher number of bed channels like 7.1. I just don't think we need to get neurotic over the high bitrate lossy vs. lossless divide.
Currently, there are thousands of albums and many more individual tracks available as multichannel/Atmos mixes on the content side. Exactly how many albums, and how many tracks would be hard to pin down since this would be an ever-moving target. Let's just say that with streaming content plus my multichannel downloads, SACD, DVD-A, and Blu-ray rips, I have easily come across more than a thousand albums that interest me such that I would not want to miss out on the experience!
There's new music being released weekly. As you've seen with my blog posts, I've been referring to new multichannel music with most of my articles over the last few years. Also, check out Spatial Audio Finder to search if your favorite artist has content available on Apple Music. While Spatial Audio Finder is quite good, I've noticed that it does miss some content and have wondered whether there might be regional content differences. I'm not a subscriber to Tidal or Amazon Music and I have seen people referring to content available on those services that I have not seen on Apple Music in my region.
All this, and of course there's the joy of multichannel/Atmos movie nights with the family that can make good use of the system.
On the hardware side, Apple has also addressed headphone playback with more sophisticated binauralization + head tracking DSP for their AirPods and other devices - well done. Perhaps ironically, even though the content is there, much more needs to be done on the hardware side for convenient access to these streaming multichannel libraries.
For the dedicated soundroom or home theater, probably the most convenient and inexpensive way is still to run an AppleTV HDMI out to a receiver for Apple Music playback. Newer Apple/ARM-processor Macs, Apple Vision Pro, HomePod, some Sonos will also work but this is far from complete and often inadequate for the discerning audiophile with his/her discrete speakers. In the same way, Tidal's spatial audio hardware compatibility is just as limited but we can add the nVidia Shield TV, and Amazon Music has their small group of hardware also. I trust in time, things will improve as mechanisms are devised to control and decode the content while manufacturers work with the streaming services to ensure fair protection for copyright holders.
On the Widows PC software side, while HDMI bit-streaming of one's music library is not difficult to achieve through JRiver or simple file playback through Media Player Classic Home Cinema in K-Lite Codec Pack, there is still much to be done for audiophiles who use systems like Roon, as recently discussed.
I hear about other multichannel streaming services being launched like Pure Audio Streaming that can offer Auro-3D encoded material to nVidia Shield TV boxes. While it's great to see new initiatives like this, I can imagine that it'll be hard to launch any new streaming service these days with the music streaming titans out there already and the competition that exists.
For those wanting to read more, here are my articles about multichannel audio and the audiophile on this blog written over the last few years that I think have covered much of the background, rationale, and technical specifics that might be of interest:
While those are some of the key articles that highlight my thoughts on multichannel audio and the audiophile, the idea of transitioning over to enjoying more multichannel content has been pervasive in my articles. Whether it's discussing the use of HDMI-capable MiniPCs as playback devices, or the use of multichannel DSP room correction (and this), there are opportunities for more advanced hobbyists to find ways to enjoy and optimize the listening.
 |
| Pretty cool looking Genelec-based, Merging Pyramix Atmos authoring station! |
So, do we need every album to be remastered/remixed in multichannel?
No, of course not. Just as there were many albums that sounded great in mono which may not have been sonically surpassed with their stereo mixes, I don't think a multichannel mix is always needed.
Having said this, I believe many songs originating from recordings with complex multitrack overlays can benefit from expansion beyond 2 channels giving them extra "room to breathe". An interesting surprise for me was Bobby McFerrin's "Don't Worry, Be Happy" (1988) with his vocal parts distinctly spread around the listener creating an intimate deconstruction for the listener. Live shows and classical performances also can use the channels to better deliver the sense of space which would have been heard during the performance. Comparatively less complex multitrack mixes like Billie Eilish's "No Time To Die" (2020) can use the surround speakers to command the atmosphere as it envelops the listener.
With more channels, there are more opportunities to convey subtle nuances and enforce dynamic contrasts including using the power of the LFE when applicable, beyond the spatial dimension. A dynamically compressed song like Cher's early Auto-Tune extravaganza "Believe" (1998) comes alive spatially and dynamically in multichannel well beyond what the DR7 stereo version on CD can deliver.
That 15% of my music collection being multichannel mentioned in the Preamble is the fastest-growing class of music on my server these days. Many of my favorite albums are already available as multichannel, some with Atmos. Just as we should be wise when selecting hi-res remasters, there will be good and there will be poor multichannel remixes: Neil Young's DVD-A Harvest was poorly done, Bryan Adam's Atmos mixes haven't been stunning, Harry Styles' Harry's House sounds strange to me, Jason Mraz, Rush, George Harrison multichannel remasters often sound unimpressive among others.
While I still on occasion will buy an LP or CD, this is becoming rare now. I simply have no need for legacy material things like these in the home and while there was a time it was novel, there's no way I'm going to be interested in cleaning vinyl, care about the whole ritual, or even opening trays and changing CDs. I shudder at the thought of downsizing in retirement (still well more than a decade away I hope!) and having to figure out how to get rid of all the CDs I already have! In my mind, other than truly rare collectable items, obsessing over physical formats tend to be distractions from enjoying music. Having said this, if there is no other way to get the music, I'm still interested in Blu-ray discs with lossless TrueHD content which I can rip/convert for the music server. At least Blu-ray packaging doesn't take up too much space.
Readers might be interested to check out the QuadraphonicQuad forums for discussions around new releases and opinions on the quality of spatial remix/remasters. Check out their surround poll chart for ratings on currently 825 albums on disc as of early 2025 across multiple formats (SACD, DVD, Blu-ray).
In closing, on a personal note, I remember vividly the very first time I heard a multichannel system in the home environment.
It was 1990 and I had a friend from a well-to-do family invite me over one summer afternoon to check out the home theater his dad had just set up. We watched Top Gun on LaserDisc (probably this Japan release from 1987 as it was brought over from Asia). It was the first time I heard the early Dolby Surround matrixed decoding system in action at home. It was also the first time I heard a powerful subwoofer in a sound room!
This demonstration of surround sound, full frequency reproduction with deep bass, immersive feeling of "being there" even through early hardware primitive by today's standards stuck with me! Compared to that first experience, today we have discrete digital multichannel, object-based audio productions, potential for hi-res bit-depth and samplerates, horizonal + height surround, multiple encoding systems (Dolby, DTS, Auro-3D formats, PCM, DSD), simple single-cable AV connection (ie. HDMI), and the convenience of on-demand streaming for all this content. I think modern audiophiles should consider contributing serious efforts into exploring all this potential!
In my experience, the qualitative change in sound jumping from 2-channel reproduction to at least a 5.1 system is well beyond what we ever could achieve going from 16/44.1 CD-resolution to something like hi-res 24/192 which was questionable since the start, yet much was made of this in the audiophile media.
I know that some audiophiles pooh-pooh the "home theater" sound and cannot imagine how such a system could be "good" for music - IMO this is misguided. If a theater system can convey the nuances of natural environments, provide clear dialogue, is technically measurably competitive to the typical audiophile DACs/amps/speakers, plus in demanding scenes can portray the power of jets and explosions, as an eclectic music lover, why would I not want that same clarity, dynamic power and immersion for whatever genre of music I throw at it!? Maybe if all I listened to were bass-limited light jazz female vocals and string quartets, I'd be satisfied with flea-watt amps and matching speakers.
My belief is that greater command of the spatial domain is the natural evolutionary trajectory that the audiophile hobby must pursue if we are to expand our experiential horizons into higher fidelity. While each of us can decide the time and place we might want/need multichannel reproduction, as a hobby at large, to stay just within the well-established walls of 2-channel purism (or worse, stuck in anachronistic technologies like vinyl/LP as if this is the "best" sound quality), IMO, would be a sad state of stagnation as we pass the first quarter of the 21st Century.
I believe that what we're seeing in the last few years, multichannel/Atmos content with expanded spatial mixes that are not severely dynamically compressed is the most meaningful gift that audiophiles have received in decades. I recommend that hi-fi enthusiasts not miss out on the experience, or worse, suffocate interest because of stale ideas or choosing to waste money and opportunities in the mystical snake-oil sandbox!
[Speaking of the snake-oil sandbox, this kind of tired nonsense is what I'm talking about. No comments/criticisms allowed, right?!]
--------------------
While I look forward to new music with multichannel/Atmos, it's great to see the expanding back catalogue growing. This week I noticed on Apple Music that Billy Joel's Spatial discography also includes his Greatest Hits, Volume 1 & Volume 2 (1985), one of the oldest CD sets I own. Check out "Goodnight Saigon" with the helicopter panning across the soundstage and seemingly flying overhead on a system with height channels, or the one on Live at Yankee Stadium (2022) for the concert perspective.
Billy Joel's Storm Front (1989) album dropped a couple months ago in multichannel/Atmos which was a good listen. I was pleasantly surprised also to see the latino-english pop album from Selena, Dreaming of You (30th Anniversary) (1995) fully available this week.
For those into live EDM recordings, Avicii at Tomorrowland Belgium 2012, 2014, 2015 were released earlier this month; enjoyable spacious mixes capturing the events (Avicii/Tim Bergling died in 2018).
Here are some kids dancing back in 2012 to old music 🙂:
I hope you're all having fun - enjoying the music among other activities of the season of course!
I'm with you, amigo, but at this point, honestly, I believe if a modern pop star recorded using tin cans tied with string, most people would still say how artistic and amazing they are. For reasons beyond me, recording and mix quality just isn't necessary.
ReplyDeleteI'd like for multi-channel music albums to become the default standard, but that’s probably not happening in our lifetime. And if it does, we’ll be too old and deaf to care.
Off topic, but I feel like saying—I’m a big fan of films with high frame rates. I think the master copy should be standardised at 240fps. It’s easy enough for consumers to choose their preferred frame rate and add in motion blur on their end. But alas, man has no use for rational thought, ideas or creativity.
P.S. I’m poorly and have been sat in a room without any air movement that's about 28°C for the past few hours, so I’m probably more cynical than usual.
Oh man Dan, stay hydrated in that heat!
DeleteOn the multichannel front, I think things are gradually changing and we'll be seeing nice transitions in this generation. At least this is the best shot I've seen for the industry moving forward in decades so this is encouraging. IMO, the time from the late 1990s to 2010's were the years of audio hardware and consumers getting used to computer audio and away from physical media as a whole. That was also the time of experimentation and dipping toes in 5.1 multichannel. I think the industry now, if we are to move forward (including for audiophiles) need to re-tool towards spatial/multichannel. This will be good across the Industry to create excitement in music consumers - but more importantly, to engage artists in expanding their visions which is ultimately what we're here to enjoy!
I'm with you on moving forward with HFR in movies as well. At least on the video front, they've been moving forward with 4K+ resolution and higher dynamic range over the last 2 decades to the point where I think consumer and artistic needs are well satisfied - except for higher frame rates! That too I think will come.
The other night, I watched a version of the Netflix show "KPop Demon Hunters" with my daughter who loves her K-Pop and wife who enjoys K-dramas with a version upscaled using AI to 48Hz which reduced complaints of choppy animation (supposedly stylistic choice).
https://www.reddit.com/r/animation/comments/1lwtypa/did_kpop_demon_hunters_have_choppy_animation/
Backgrounds looked buttery smooth even though the main character animation still looked a bit choppy but not as bad as "intended". Anyhow, the family loved the smoothness in many of the scenes when I asked them about it later... They had no idea this was an HFR version. 😊
Sony can do what they want with their animations of course, but gradually, for many genres (including 3D animations that look like video games anyways), 48/60/120+ fps should just look "normal" for most of us already without getting stuck at 24fps as if that's what movies should look like forever. 😱
Hi amigo,
DeleteI should’ve added more details.
I've looked into height channels, but unfortunately, my room's ceiling is too low for them to sound good. I’d like to see multichannel mixes released as the default. As for streaming Dolby Atmos, I looked into it maybe six months ago, and none of the major streaming services supported Dolby Atmos on Windows 11 PCs at the time. Streaming multichannel audio is awkward, and currently, I’d have to buy new equipment. I agree—I have no issue with Dolby Atmos being streamed as lossy audio.
I’d also like to see multichannel downloads become available. Dolby Atmos can be placed in an MKV container. I know I’m opinionated, but I believe the best idea is for artists to release two mixes—then everyone’s happy.
I don’t know much about Korean cinema; I’ve seen maybe two Korean films. I wouldn't be surprised if Korea, like us Westerners, has fetishised choppy animation the same way we’ve fetishised 1920s limitations as “artistic integrity.” I seem to be in the minority for thinking, do we really need to see a new, modern Superman smudge?
Hi Archimago! After reading your passage about Bobby McFerrin's multichannel remaster, I realized I would like to hear your opinion on what is your personal preference for vocal mixing in multichannel. Do you prefer it to be done mostly in the center channel, so that there is only one physical source of the signal, and thus no comb filtering as with stereo reproduction, or do you still prefer the "old way" of constructing the vocalist image via the phantom center?
ReplyDelete