Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Music Now Rolling Out Support for Spatial Audio and Lossless Audio
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You do realize it existed on tidal for like 2 years right? I have heard it.
Go cry about your internet points to someone else. It's a disagree button not a dislike button.
Forcing Dolby Atmos on tracks recorded/produced without Spatial Audio in origin is silly, gimmick and potentially counterproductive.
Listen to the music as it was supposed to be. Consider remastering, in case, nothing more.
Leave Dolby Atmos for current or future recordings if the artist want to leverage this audio technology.
Listen to the music as it was supposed to be. Consider remastering, in case, nothing more.
Leave Dolby Atmos for current or future recordings if the artist want to leverage this audio technology.
I see that high res lossless has been unleashed also, at least to 24/48, unless higher, no way to immediately tell on the app & on pods so don’t get benefit.
Lossless is lossless , how come atmos make the music sound better, ah ok by manipulating the sound ?
Is it possible for songs in an album labeled Dolby Atoms to not be Dolby Atmos? In Taylor swifts new album. One song doesn’t show the Dolby atoms label.
edit: a couple songs from the album don’t show it and are significantly louder than the rest of the album.
edit: a couple songs from the album don’t show it and are significantly louder than the rest of the album.
Question:
What quality is the Dolby Atmos? Is it 256 AAC or a little bit higher than that? Or do we need time for folks to dive in and investigate that?
What quality is the Dolby Atmos? Is it 256 AAC or a little bit higher than that? Or do we need time for folks to dive in and investigate that?
Huh... I redownloaded Chromatica and ROM is the only song not playing in Atmos
So... I've tried a couple of nicely produced songs that are in the playlist "Made for Spatial Audio"...
It gives you the illusion that the sound is more spread out - I suspect this is just a binaural type of mastering, BUT they need to fine tune it... I'm happy with hearing backing vocals more spread out, riffs of guitars flying around etc... But the drums and the baselines almost disappear!
It gives you the illusion that the sound is more spread out - I suspect this is just a binaural type of mastering, BUT they need to fine tune it... I'm happy with hearing backing vocals more spread out, riffs of guitars flying around etc... But the drums and the baselines almost disappear!
Yes, nothing to see here. Back to Qobuz until there is an exclusive mode and correct bit rate / depth changes on MacOS
Also I'd recommend folks trying turning off Atmos, and turning on "Lossless."
I think many of you will be more impressed with the lossless, depending on your listening device.
I think many of you will be more impressed with the lossless, depending on your listening device.
Does everyone have the storage space! Just tested a random song. Joe Jackson Steeping Out. Went from 10.1 too 28.3 mb. Lossless, not hi res lossless.
note I tried downloading in high res after deleting and the file size was still 28.3. Is there a different logo if high res available? On iPhone.
note I tried downloading in high res after deleting and the file size was still 28.3. Is there a different logo if high res available? On iPhone.
Exactly , ok if newer music was remastered in studio with dolby/atmos or spatial audo maybe , but for 99% of the music out there , adding those stupid gimmicks is like old black and white footage with layers and layers of colour. Stupid Apple are you
Not going to lie, but I cannot the tell difference even with Apple’s demo playlist for stereo to spatial. Using AP Pro’s.
Think I might be deaf lmao
Think I might be deaf lmao
This is the reason I’m glad I got a 256GB iPhone. Taylor Swifts new album in lossless (not high resolution) is over 800MB 😳
Spatial means different things in different context.
- "Spatial Audio" is apple branding for technology supporting positional sound
- "Dolby Atmos" is tech where sound is encoded with positions (i.e "play this in left front corner"), as opposed to traditional surround sound where sound is encoded with specific channels (i.e "play this on left front channel/speaker ").
- The playback system will interpret the instruction of "left corner" and send it to the appropriate channels. For example Apple headphones and laptops only have 2 channels, so the software will do some trickery to simulate the effect of a LF corner.
On some applications, like watching videos, the Spatial Audio is implemented so your head is positioned relative to the phone/computer. When you turn your head, sounds appear to come from the same place relative to your physical room (where phone/computer is).
On applications like listening to music, there is no FIXED PHYSICAL reference points. Turning your head does nothing.
********************
Also Spatial/Atmos has nothing to do with Lossless. Which by the way cannot be played through apple bluetooth devices today due to limitation in bluetooth bandwidth. all signals are passed as lossy AAC
One must listen to Apple’s Made for Spatial Audio playlist as the first thing to do after making sure all the settings are properly set in the settings for the Music app. Eye (ear) opening.
agreed. its probably useful for some electronic music, electro pop, and some ethereal and spacey stuff like sigur ros. most classic rock doesnt fit, and re-mastering in spatial format seems a bit unnatural
I notice some songs lose Atmos when playing through a Bluetooth speaker. Are you playing it over Bluetooth?
I might be completely wrong here, but if you’re listening over Bluetooth and turn on lossless aren’t you then just relying on data being discarded probably at random due to the lack of bandwidth?
If that’s true that can’t be good can it? Surely a proper audio codec does a better job at deciding what needs keeping and what doesn’t and so will sound ‘better’ (I know better is subjective when it comes to audio).
If that’s true that can’t be good can it? Surely a proper audio codec does a better job at deciding what needs keeping and what doesn’t and so will sound ‘better’ (I know better is subjective when it comes to audio).
No one’s forcing anything on recordings. There has been a surround re-mixings of music since the days of DVD-Audio.