![]() The main promise of ATMOS was that it wouldn't matter how many speakers you had - a mixer could prepare a final mix in Atmos in his 60-horn room, but then when the bitstream on the DCP or Blu-Ray was decoded in the theater or home, it wouldn't matter if the end-user had a 60-speaker Atmos rig, a 9.1, a Barco Auro speaker system, a 5.1, a stereo or even a mono. I'm a sound designer in Hollywood, my credits include Men in Black 3 and Zero Dark Thirty. hell, most people i know have their 5.1 systems setup wrong. That being said, I agree that more than 5.1 would be overkill for the average family and would appeal only to those who either have a large amount of discretionary spending or to movie buffs who feel that they have to get the full iĪnd yes, you dont have enough speakers and amps for atmos at home. That's largely because we either enjoy watching movies or, in the case of my brother-in-law, enjoys playing video games on his PS3. That being said, most of my friends and family have 5.1 surround. It could be that most people do not have more than 2.1. Do you really think setting up a shitload of speakers all around the room is going to pass? Putting glasses on to watch a movie was too much for them. But people are lazy and don't want to put any effort into their mindless entertainment. If they can ditch the glasses, they might actually succeed. ![]() Period.ģD TV at least had a vague hope of succeeding in the mass market. Anything that requires that much dedication of the room to audio is not going to sell to the mass market. It's not even a fad - it's dead on arrival. There's always some situation where you want a sound to come from every speaker in the room, or to come from speakers on the opposite sides of the room, with equal intensity: the latter is impossible with B-format (and only possible in the limit with n channels), and the former is impossible with any theoretical pure ambisonic sound system. This happens with 5.1 but the effect is mitigated by the fact that there's a center speaker behind the screen, and the mixers have individual control over speaker levels and panner divergence.Īmbisonic mixes are almost by definition not mono-compatible and don't allow the mixers to address sounds to individual speakers with unlimited panner divergence. Speakers near the walls will always tend to be perceived as louder, and the further you are from the tuned center of the room, the more the sound field will appear to be warped toward the closest wall. The problem with Ambisonics is it tends to favor a strong Sweet Spot, which is OK in a home theater but will fail in a large room, where people are seated to the four corners of the space.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |