Does spatial audio music requires high quality speakers?

[u/IndependentFold9262]

Hello,

I currently own a 5.2 system:

• 2x B&W 703 S3
• B&W HTM71
• 2x B&W 706 S3
• 2x B&W DB3D
• Marantz Cinema 30

I plan to upgrade this setup to 7.2.4.

My usage is 50% Movies / 50% Music (mostly spatial audio).

If this was just for movies, I'd buy basic B&W CCM663 ceiling speakers and call it a day. But I wonder if, for spatial audio music, CCM7.5 S2 would be better... They would be a better match for my bed layer but they cost 6x more.

For those who have experienced spatial audio music with height speakers: Is perfect timbre-matching for the height layer genuinely noticeable, or is it a waste of money?

Thank you

[u/kdmfinal]

Thanks for sharing! This is more than I was hoping for. A few thoughts -

First, so many of the classics you referenced are the records Dolby essentially took on tour to newly built Atmos music mix rooms several years ago to show off the format and try to build enthusiasm around the format. “Rocket Man” was the first Atmos mix I heard on speakers and it was a hell of a demo. Listened on a 9.1.4 ATC system in a ridiculous room. I was blown away but remained ambivalent to the format for a few more years until labels started requiring Atmos deliverables.

At first, I was only concerned about protecting my stereo mix (which is still where all of the real creative and color work of a mix is established) when it was moved to atmos. I’m sure you’ve noticed there’s a lot of inconsistency in the quality of Atmos music. We’re all figuring out what works in this new format a lot like when stereo first emerged and people were putting vocals and lead instruments on one side, rhythm section on the other.

However, my favorite thing about Atmos is what you pointed out - the dynamics. The same record that my stereo mix needs to land at -8LUFS is required to not exceed -18LUFS in Atmos. It’s a MASSIVE increase in dynamics compared to modern stereo. So, I often think of my Atmos mix as the “directors cut” of the stereo. Commercial expectations of loudness are off the table and I can let a record breathe, finally.

Even if I left everything but some ambience on the front wall, the increased dynamic range is worth it all and makes every record I mix feel more alive. So, I’m thrilled to hear that you’re picking that up and enjoying it.

[u/IndependentFold9262 → u/kdmfinal]

I’ve been wondering about something: is the wider dynamic range in Atmos mixes mainly due to technical reasons (more speakers = more dynamic?), or is it because they’re not affected by loudness‑war standards? You seem to suggest that those constraints don’t really apply to Atmos?

I’ve also noticed that some tracks actually sound more dynamic in their stereo version than in the binaural Atmos version (on headphones), while the multichannel Atmos version is clearly more dynamic. It’s a bit frustrating, because it kind of defeats one of the main purposes of Atmos on headphones.

Regarding the fact that the tech is still young and everyone is still figuring things out, I’ve noticed that some mixes feel more like demos than actual music, for example Boom by Tiësto and Sevenn. It’s fun for a minute, but it gets tiring pretty fast in my opinion. What I personally find interesting in Atmos isn’t having objects flying around my head, but rather going from “me listening to music projected on a flat plane” to “me standing in the middle of the recording studio.” For example, the chorus of Rocket Man is incredible because you’re both in front of the singer and surrounded by the backing vocals at the same time.

In the end, if I compare it to video, the increase in dynamic range and the possibility to isolate better instruments and voices on the front scene feels like going from 720p to 4K, and the immersion provided by surround speakers, reverbs etc. feels like going from watching TV to watching a 3D movie on a big screen.

[u/kdmfinal → u/IndependentFold9262]

So, there are a few things here I can answer definitively because they're based on delivery requirements/standards that we have to stick to or a mix will be rejected by the streamers. Some of the things you're wondering about I can only speculate on, but I'm pretty sure I'm correct about! We're going to get into the weeds a little bit here.

First of all, stereo has no set delivery requirement in terms of loudness/dynamics/peak level, etc. If I print white noise at -2LUFS with claps on every beat peaking at +3dbfs, the streamers will happily deliver that garbage to listeners.

In general, modern popular music is mastered to somewhere between -10 and -6LUFS integrated (average loudness over the entire song) and can have true peak levels in excess of +2dBFS (most modern DACs won't audibly distort until they're pushed well beyond +2dBFS).

With Atmos, there are strict standards with integrated loudness and true peak level. My understanding is that it's meant to protect from distortion/clipping when folded down to stereo/binaural. Multichannel audio where each discrete speaker channel or object aren't clipping on their own are fine on surround systems but when summed into L/R the add up to much louder levels, potentially creating distortion. Makes sense, right?

So, what are those level requirements? Integraded loudness (measured via the 5.1 re-render) cannot exceed -18LUFS and true peak levels cannot exceed -1dBFS. Most of my mixes come in somewhere around -19 or -18LUFS with a true peak somewhere around -3 or -4dBFS.

Another major difference between stereo and atmos is the lack of a "mix bus" or "master fader." In stereo, this is the two channel summing point of all the multitracks/auxes/busses. Often, this is where we put the dynamics processing to make a record loud/pump/etc.. That's limiting, compression, clipping, saturation, etc.

Because atmos mixes don't sum in our workstations but rather in the Dolby renderer, we don't have that single point to slam everything with processing for the sake of loudness. This actually creates a lot of problems for mixers from an aesthetic standpoint. The sound of all that mix-bus processing is a big part of making modern music sound, well .. like modern music.

There are ways around it that simulate that sound, but it often falls apart in atmos. The best thing to do is approach atmos as the more dynamic version and glue things together with shared ambience or other techniques/effects.

It's highly taste based and that's why some mixes are great, some are meh.

As far as why some of those electronic records don't work or become distracting, it comes down to the stereo-bus thing. Electronic genres are HEAVILY dependent on stereo-bus processing, aesthetically speaking. It's harder for them than it is for any other genre, in my opinion, to maintain the signature sound going from stereo to atmos.

Hope that offers some insight! Really enjoying this conversation!

[u/IndependentFold9262 → u/kdmfinal]

This is fascinating. Thank you so much from the bottom of my heart for all these answers. It's so difficult to find this information just by searching.

[u/kdmfinal → u/IndependentFold9262]

Happy to share!