5 Reasons Dolby Atmos May Be DOA

[William Lemmerhirt]

I upgraded cause the kool aid is deeeelishus...

 

[VonMagnum]

Cherry or Lime?

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Cherry limeade!

 

[Auditor55]

I ran into this article while being bored at break at work. Boy does this article look stupid now...and yet the reasons it gives are true. But those of us that like Atmos don't care if cheap or erroneous systems are out there or Atmos phones even so long as the content keeps coming! I have over 200 Atmos, X and Auro-3D movies (whether streaming or on Blu-ray) in less than two years. I'd call that a success, but then again I also have over 200 3D movies in the same time period (with much overlap, often thanks to remuxing) and 3D us considered dead.....



Dude.... WTF?!?

And that's 17.1, not 20.....

WOW, you think 300 movies is a lot. There are tens of thousands of movies. Atmos encoded movies haven't scratched the surface, DTS-X is a joke. 300 movies is not a success. Atmos is just like 3-D TV, bound to fall by the wayside, especially since its so dependent to UHD disc, which is dying or should I say the industry is killing it off. Streaming Atmos? Not a lot of stuff out there.

 

[Auditor55]

I don't notice the rear heights are as dramatic an improvement as the front heights were. It's difficult to point them at the MLP in my room and still be asthetically pleasing. I've been considering moving the rear heights to in ceiling.

Be careful with that, do you really want sounds firing straight down to you listening position just for few helicopter fly byes? Sounds coming directly from above you can be very distracting, can really ruin the experience by taking you out of the movie instead of immersing you. In the picture below, take note of where seating is and where the front ceiling speakers are, in that Dolby Atmos recommended set up those front ceiling speakers would be useless because where the sofa is.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

WOW, you think 300 movies is a lot. There are tens of thousands of movies. Atmos encoded movies haven't scratched the surface, DTS-X is a joke. 300 movies is not a success. Atmos is just like 3-D TV, bound to fall by the wayside, especially since its so dependent to UHD disc, which is dying or should I say the industry is killing it off. Streaming Atmos? Not a lot of stuff out there.

Wow! Thanks for the reality check. I’m gonna hurry up and remove my ceiling speakers and sell my Atmos AVR and all my Atmos/DTS-X movies. Can’t believe I wasted all that time and money. When asked I’ll say A55 said it’s all a waste. I’ll spread the word for ya.
Oh btw, here’s a pretty good list of stuff available.

Statistics Page - Blu-rayStats.com

IMO that’s pretty good for only being in the market for 5 years. Not to mention, Disney plus and Netflix original Atmos content. Just saying...

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Be careful with that, do you really want sounds firing straight down to you listening position just for few helicopter fly byes? Sounds coming directly from above you can be very distracting, can really ruin the experience by taking you out of the movie instead of immersing you.

Yeah for sure. I hate when a mix actually uses XYZ coordinates and objects. That’s much less engaging than something super exciting. Like dialog.....

 

[Auditor55]

Wow! Thanks for the reality check. I’m gonna hurry up and remove my ceiling speakers and sell my Atmos AVR and all my Atmos/DTS-X movies. Can’t believe I wasted all that time and money. When asked I’ll say A55 said it’s all a waste. I’ll spread the word for ya.
Oh btw, here’s a pretty good list of stuff available.

Statistics Page - Blu-rayStats.com

IMO that’s pretty good for only being in the market for 5 years. Not to mention, Disney plus and Netflix original Atmos content. Just saying...

Where is my Atmos copy of Lord of the Rings? Also, you do realize that DVD still outsell Blu Ray by far and we know Atmos isn't coming to any DVD's. Blu Rays and optical disc in general is clearly on the way out. Also, no need to take this personal, just giving my opinion and/or critique on the state of the tech, just my viewpoints. Not trying insult anyone, I'm sure you have set up a nice system and you have the knowledge to tweak and fine tune your system to get good experience from it.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Where is my Atmos copy of Lord of the Rings?

How should I know? So the ONE disk you want isn’t on the list? Yep. Total failure.

Ask Peter Jackson

 

[VonMagnum]

WOW, you think 300 movies is a lot. There are tens of thousands of movies.

Yeah, and how many are worth watching? I own over 1200 movies. They're not all in immersive...oh wait with Neural X, YES THEY ARE (well the mono ones still aren't, I suppose).

Atmos encoded movies haven't scratched the surface

All new things take time.

DTS-X is a joke.

Um...yeah I'm pretty certain it's not a joke. The Harry Potter movies in DTS:X are flipping AWESOME.

300 movies is not a success.

That's just how many I personally have purchased in the last year and a half, dude. That's not the total number available and it's only been out a few years.

Atmos is just like 3-D TV, bound to fall by the wayside, especially since its so dependent to UHD disc, which is dying or should I say the industry is killing it off. Streaming Atmos? Not a lot of stuff out there.

How is it dependent on the UHD disc??? Somehow, I don't think you don't know all that much about that which you speak.

I have Atmos streaming over the Internet here from:

iTunes
Disney+
Netflix
Prime
Vudu
Fandango Now (which also does DTS:X now)

Oh, it also works from regular Blu-Rays as well (they don't have to be UHD) and it will also be a part of the new broadcast standards (ATSC 3.0) that will be phased in over the next several years.

 

[Auditor55]

How should I know? So the ONE disk you want isn’t on the list? Yep. Total failure.

Ask Peter Jackson

The Lord of Rings Trilogy is far superior to the Star Wars prequels and the new Star Wars crap, but yet they will keep remastering them for purchase. I need to have Lord of the Rings on UHD to take this stuff seriously.

 

[Auditor55]

Yeah, and how many are worth watching? I own over 1200 movies. They're not all in immersive...oh wait with Neural X, YES THEY ARE (well the mono ones still aren't, I suppose).



All new things take time.



Um...yeah I'm pretty certain it's not a joke. The Harry Potter movies in DTS:X are flipping AWESOME.



That's just how many I personally have purchased in the last year and a half, dude. That's not the total number available and it's only been out a few years.



How is it dependent on the UHD disc??? Somehow, I don't think you don't know all that much about that which you speak.

I have Atmos streaming over the Internet here from:

iTunes
Disney+
Netflix
Prime
Vudu
Fandango Now (which also does DTS:X now)

Oh, it also works from regular Blu-Rays as well (they don't have to be UHD) and it will also be a part of the new broadcast standards (ATSC 3.0) that will be phased in over the next several years.

Just let me take the two most popular streaming services, Netflix and Prime. Have you seen Prime Dolby Atmos offerings? Netflix is much better with Dolby Atmos and Dolby Vision. However, Netflix only offer it on their original material and not on first run movies. To me its still not enough to justify setting up an Atmos system.

 

[RichB]

Where is my Atmos copy of Lord of the Rings?

It will likely come with the HDR(+) or DV version of the films along with the Hobbit trilogy. No one is going to release a new version with only an audio upgrade and that should tell you something.

- Rich

 

[BMXTRIX]

Remember, until Lord of the Rings is released with Atmos... Atmos is a failure.

There is no other way to measure Atmos as being successful. It doesn't matter how many places stream it. It doesn't matter how many devices play it back. It doesn't matter how many products exist with Atmos capabilities.

Lord of the Rings or bust.

 

[VonMagnum]

I've seen remastered regular Blu-rays offer Atmos or X as a matter of course (e.g. The Fifth Element or Gravity), but no they don't seem to do it for JUST Atmos too much. OTOH, it's nice on iTunes if you buy a movie there you get any upgrades for free. You get Atmos upgrades even for titles that you only have in 2K due to Movies Anywhere. If Atmos is available for a movie, generally you get it regardless when it's added. I've had all kinds of old movie purchases and digital copies get upgraded to 4K and/or Atmos for free. I've bought several movies on Blu-ray that were only 2K but came with iTunes digital copies and so it gave me 4K anyway. It's been quite the bargain for getting a 4K collection going and has probably increased my Atmos library 50% or more as well as even the movies anywhere 2K copies from 3D movies that were only in 5.1 or 7.1 typically get Atmos sound upgrades even if Movies Anywhere doesn't give me a 4K copy.

Disney has been an exception since Apple has been unable to secure 4K and Atmos versions due to Disney wanting to charge $30-35 and Apple insisting on $20 maximum. But now most are available on Disney+ in 4K and Atmos.

 

[Auditor55]

Remember, until Lord of the Rings is released with Atmos... Atmos is a failure.

There is no other way to measure Atmos as being successful. It doesn't matter how many places stream it. It doesn't matter how many devices play it back. It doesn't matter how many products exist with Atmos capabilities.

Lord of the Rings or bust.

Well Atmos is clearly not a failure among the uber niche crowd, which is probably less than one half of percent of the global audio/video buying public. I would still like to see some hardcore numbers. I want to know what percent of people with an AVR has an Atmos set up, those numbers will help us to determine if it is a success, if not what else? How do you deem something as a success or failure ?

 

[Auditor55]

It will likely come with the HDR(+) or DV version of the films along with the Hobbit trilogy. No one is going to release a new version with only an audio upgrade and that should tell you something.

- Rich

That's cool if we get an Atmos UHD disc of LOTR's. Anyway, I'm starting have my doubts about the HDR thing. I'm starting to believe it was a gimmick. At least how its being implemented on today's displays. I find the SDR versions more pleasing to watch, less noise more color saturation, and a natural look. Anyway, I point to Lord of the Rings as a way to kind of take the temperature of the Atmos format/4K format, to see how serious or viable the format is.

 

[VonMagnum]

I don't care if Atmos/X is a "success" in mass consumption terms so long as it's available on movies released at home. I could say the same about 3D video, but the TV industry seems intent on dumping it anyway.

As for HDR, I've always said it's a gimmick to make 4K noticeably "different" looking from 1080p as the resolution alone is not enough to notice on most average sized sets at typical viewing distances. I find HDR color often oversaturated into the surreal realm on the QLED I have. I turned it down as much as it allowed me, but it's still hyper surreal with some material. But hey, it looks different.....

HDR contrast can be impressive, but it's oddly unnatural as well since with enough brightness in the real world, your own eyes wouldn't allow what they achieve at lower light levels with HDR, which is to allow a half night and half daylight scene on the screen at the same time with no reduction in contrast. It's just not realistic and they typically need multiple exposures and or computer editing to do it since real world cameras and film have exposure limitations too. Digital cameras make it seem possible, but they are just doing the multiple exposures and processing internally.

 

[RichB]

HDR can be quite impressive when done properly. Unfortunately, most displays cannot display the full range and have applied tone-mapping that reduces mid-tone brightness which makes HDR look darker than its SDR counterparts. That appears to be improving. I disabled all tone-mapping on my C9.

Most HDR displays have wider color gamut and essentially cove the P3 gamut used in cinema's. This is often overlooked but even with added brightness color volume is is eye-opening and IMO the most important advancement.

4K is also beneficial because all resolutions are compressed so the effect resolution is less. When properly encoded, a 4K encoded BD easily bests the 2K counterpart. Streaming is more compressed of course but has provided some excellent results which can exceed a 2K BD.

My system if 5.1 but Atmos mixes tend to be better surround mixed and I have found improvements.

4K, HDR, 2020 colorspace, and Atmos are all improvements that are not going away.
Atmos is backward compatible so comparisons to 3D are not applicable.

- Rich

 

[Auditor55]

I don't care if Atmos/X is a "success" in mass consumption terms so long as it's available on movies released at home. I could say the same about 3D video, but the TV industry seems intent on dumping it anyway.

As for HDR, I've always said it's a gimmick to make 4K noticeably "different" looking from 1080p as the resolution alone is not enough to notice on most average sized sets at typical viewing distances. I find HDR color often oversaturated into the surreal realm on the QLED I have. I turned it down as much as it allowed me, but it's still hyper surreal with some material. But hey, it looks different.....

HDR contrast can be impressive, but it's oddly unnatural as well since with enough brightness in the real world, your own eyes wouldn't allow what they achieve at lower light levels with HDR, which is to allow a half night and half daylight scene on the screen at the same time with no reduction in contrast. It's just not realistic and they typically need multiple exposures and or computer editing to do it since real world cameras and film have exposure limitations too. Digital cameras make it seem possible, but they are just doing the multiple exposures and processing internally.

Mass consumption is usually a determining factor as to whether or not a format will succeed in the market. Remember laserdisc, much better than VHS, it had digital audio way back then even before many commercial cinemas, however it never really took off, it remained in the niche. Laserdisc was the only way to experience Dolby Digital or DTS in the home. Eventually it fail way side even with strong support from the HT enthusiast and videophiles. That failure threatened the long term viability of home DTS and Dolby Digital. Then came DVD, oh my god, DVD blew the heck up, one of greatest consumer electronics/video formats in history and guess what, it carried Dolby Digital and DTS audio tracks. So DVD, Dolby Digital and DTS became widespread, mass consumers success.

I kind of see Atmos and DTS-X in similar situation that Dolby Digital and DTS was in the laser disc era. This time it might be streaming that crosses both formats over threshold into widespread consumer success.

I have to agree with you about HDR. They hyped it up to get people to buy 4K sets which offer no real advantage over 1080p simply because we have to factor in screen size, seating distance and human visual acuity issues. We can't just factor in resolution, with 4k having 4 times the resolution of 1080p, which was how 4K TV's were initially being marketed. As far QLED, from what I heard, they have a greater capability of displaying more colors (wider color gamut) than competing displays. So they tend to look oversaturated even without HDR engaged.