Stereophile's Jim Austin Says Streaming Atmos Sucks

[Dimifoot]

Got any proof?

No. I am describing what I am hearing. I thought it was obvious that this was subjective, musical enjoyment, not measurements.

 

[voodooless]

No. I am describing what I am hearing. I thought it was obvious that this was subjective, musical enjoyment, not measurements.

Well, that’s exactly the problem. So far, nobody showed any objective data here.

 

[Dimifoot]

Objectively it’s compressed. DD+
We know that.

Do you want me to organise a double blind study, with a statisticaly significant number of listeners, in order to express my opinion on how it sounds?

 

[voodooless]

Do you want me to organise a double blind study, with a statisticaly significant number of listeners, in order to express my opinion on how it sounds?

Yes please!

 

[Dimifoot]

Yes please!

Are you funding it?

 

[voodooless]

Are you funding it?

No, I asked nicely . Besides, we’re with a forum full of smart members. I’m sure we could make an objective test with very little monetary effort.

 

[Dimifoot]

No, I asked nicely . Besides, we’re with a forum full of smart members. I’m sure we could make an objective test with very little monetary effort.

Of course.
We could also make an objective test for audible threshold of SINAD or IMD or Jitter measurements, and we haven’t.
But we prefer excellence in measurements.
Lossy DD+ is far from excellent in 2024. Objectively.
We should ask for more, as we do in equipment reviews.

I mentioned my subjective evaluation of Tidal Atmos, noting that I am biased in favour of Atmos and steaming. If anything, I should be happy with what’s available, but I am not.

Other members have mentioned that Apple Atmos might be better than Tidal and I am willing to try it.

Now, if we only accept double blind evidence for every post in this thread, I suppose that there’s no reason to continue, maybe admins should lock it now.

 

[RobL]

Where does one go to audition SOTA Dolby Atmos playback?

If you’re in California Genelec will have an immersive setup at NAMM.

 

[dfuller]

So is that what you would have said 10 or 20 years ago about lossless 2ch streaming?

Er, no, though 20 years ago streaming CD quality audio would have been considered basically unfeasible without very high bandwidth internet, and what was the point anyway since streaming wasn't a thing like it is now.

An by the way, lossless 4.0 & 5.1 flac doesn't require enormous files, I've got hundreds on my harddrive and listened to them for years, they're incredilble.

I know that. Have you seen how big ADM BWFs are? A 4:30 song requires a 2-2.5GB file if not larger. That's why it's being lossy compressed on even high fidelity streaming services, even the best mobile data connections aren't going to handle that bandwidth requirement very well.

A pity you don't like spatial audio in general, but that's your loss.

I love it for anything that isn't music, FWIW.

 

[voodooless]

Of course.
We could also make an objective test for audible threshold of SINAD or IMD or Jitter measurements, and we haven’t.
But we prefer excellence in measurements.

Maybe because this has been done extensively already and it’s quite clear that modern electronics offer performance way beyond audibility.

Lossy DD+ is far from excellent in 2024. Objectively.
We should ask for more, as we do in equipment reviews.

Sure, if we can have better, I’m all for it. But at the same time, let’s objectively very what we actually have right now.

I mentioned my subjective evaluation of Tidal Atmos, noting that I am biased in favour of Atmos and steaming.

You don’t know all your biases though. It’s well known that the ATMOs movie mixes used by the streaming services are not the same as on the physical media. Consequently, the codec got blamed, while in reality the different mix is much more to blame. The bias is born, and it’s really hard to get rid of it. The same happens in the early MP3 days. Because it wasn’t transparent back then, people still pretend there is an obvious difference between 320 Kbps MP3 and lossless audio. MP3 never got rid of the bias.

If anything, I should be happy with what’s available, but I am not.

I am doesn’t mean I would use lossless ATMOS if it were available. See it this way: if it turns out that in objective tests you don’t hear the difference, you’ll think your current position is just silly. It happens to plenty of people before with all kinds of audio gear..

Other members have mentioned that Apple Atmos might be better than Tidal and I am willing to try it.

I doubt Apple will have a different ATMOS version… if so, it would only prove that the codec is most likely not the problem.

Now, if we only accept double blind evidence for every post in this thread, I suppose that there’s no reason to continue, maybe admins should lock it now.

No, not only. But only accepting anecdotal evidence is also not the way to go. It just leads to more speculation and bias.

 

[Dimifoot]

So let me understand.
You are stating that DD+ Atmos is indistinguishable from TrueHD Atmos?

 

[voodooless]

So let me understand.
You are stating that DD+ Atmos is indistinguishable from TrueHD Atmos?

No, I did not. I don’t know either way. I do suspect though, that it’s much harder than people make it out to be.

 

[JustJones]

I guess in a way I'm lucky as I barely have the room for 2.1 system so I'll never need worry about Atmos lossless or lossy or whatever they come up with. Maybe one day a headphone or head gear apparatus that can do it?

 

[Dimifoot]

No, I did not. I don’t know either way. I do suspect though, that it’s much harder than people make it out to be.

Next time you have the chance, ask someone to swap the codec without you knowing what’s playing.
And you will find out.

 

[mhardy6647]

The Atmos objects have very low data rate and have fair amount of degradation in fidelity. They were there for effects in movies where such fidelity doesn't matter much. But for music, it is not optimal. In AB tests of this, the Atmos version sounded brighter and definitely not as good.

Brighter and low data rate wouldnt' seem to be correlated a priori to me(?). Sounds like two different things going on (??).
Oh, while I am wasting forum bandwidth: "Definitely not as good" doesn't seem like a very ASR-flavored assessment. I guess it's more quantitative than "not as good", though.

 

[ivayvr]

I don't think that the old Jimmy is worthy of any analysis. He is the main reason I decided not to renew my subscription after ten years. I gave him a chance for a year but I figured that most of the time he is wrong. I simply couldn't stand his pseudo intellectual/philosophical musings!

 

[Justdafactsmaam]

If you’re in California Genelec will have an immersive setup at NAMM.

Of course I will still be in China. But thanks! That sounds like the sort of thing that would do it.

 

[teched58]

@Archimago has posted his thoughts: On Stereophile's "Dolby Atmos: A Bleak Shadow?" - really?

Strongly urge everyone to go to Archimago's site and read his detailed thoughts. That said, here is his conclusion (which focuses on the uber-issue of why SP seems to be so anti-MC. Bit rates and stuff like that are discussed in the main body of his piece.)

"I guess traditional magazines like Stereophile and TAS don't seem to be encouraging audiophiles to demand multichannel/Atmos based on what seems like tepid interest and IMO unfounded negativity towards EAC3 multichannel streaming. If they want to stay within their 2-channel niche including promotion of vinyl and other sorts of anachronistic hardware (including tubes, wire ruminations, unfounded tweaks), so be it.

However, that might not be a good attitude to take for the sake of growing the high-fidelity hobby going forward especially if the traditional 2-channel "high-end" side of the hobby stagnates and the vinyl "revival" declines (IMO, this is inevitable)."​

I also want to point to this nugget from the main part of his post:

"If we care about numbers having audible significance, why doesn't Jim Austin focus on some real hi-fi inadequacies like the fact that LPs only have at best ~70dB of dynamic range, and maybe -30dB crosstalk with a good phono cartridge."

 

[krabapple]

There’s a noticeable and annoying sound quality degradation with Dolby Atmos lossy streaming compared to physical media Dolby Atmos.

And you're 100% sure it's due to lossy data compression?

 

[krabapple]

Well, it can’t be the expense. ATMOS lovers have no issues paying that fee.

Sound quality, cost, plenty to disdain for both.

The only reason to disdain MQA is because it's useless and not free. It doesn't 'sound' better or worse.