I had the same reaction
How do they know what they are claiming…and how skewed is the data if it’s relying on folks with all the data sharing turned on?
Or is there something far creepier in how they are tracking this usage?
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.
More Than Half of Apple Music Listeners Using Spatial Audio, Says Apple Exec
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I had the same reaction
How do they know what they are claiming…and how skewed is the data if it’s relying on folks with all the data sharing turned on?
Or is there something far creepier in how they are tracking this usage?
If you are using Airpods, Airpods Pro or Airpods Pro Max, or any Beats headphones, even if they supported lossless audio, you wouldn't be able to hear the difference between AAC and lossless in 99% of the conditions you listen. Forget about lossless, if you are using these outdoors, you wouldn't be able to differentiate between 192kbps AAC and 256kbps AAC.
At home when I'm listening to my Hifi stereo, I use lossless. But using these wireless buds, I couldn't care less.
About spatial audio, the atmos mixes are sometimes better than stereo mixes, sometimes worse. Depends on the track really. But some tracks are really better with atmos so that's a welcome addition.
At home when I'm listening to my Hifi stereo, I use lossless. But using these wireless buds, I couldn't care less.
About spatial audio, the atmos mixes are sometimes better than stereo mixes, sometimes worse. Depends on the track really. But some tracks are really better with atmos so that's a welcome addition.
This is fairly easy to do. Since they monitor their streaming service, they know how many users are using it, what type of files are being streamed. I still think most people who are streaming it are unaware themselves that it's in Spatial Audio, a lot of new albums have been released with it mixed that way and since it's on by default it's probably how the number is so high.
Most music is mostly made for "left and right stereo". There have been times in the past when albums were specifically made for quadrophonic systems, for instance. And within basic stereo, there have been numerous variations. Some albums have been recorded specifically for binaural listening (essentially, specifically for headphones - and sounding less optimal if played over traditional speakers). Arguably, binaural recordings, while still two-channel, are different from stereo recordings.
There's also a big difference within two-channel recordings over the decades, depending on what they thought they were targeting as listening hardware. Lots of pop music was mixed to sound good on early car radios. Lots of music has been heavily compressed over the years - not talking about bitrate, but rather about screwing with the waveform so that it loses dynamic range, so there's only loud, with no sense of subtlety, no chance for quieter notes - because there are too many music producers and executives who think that louder must be better (historically, some compression was also done to keep from hitting limits in vinyl record / turntable technology - too quiet and the sound would get lost in the LP's noise floor, while too loud and the needle might literally get knocked out of the groove).
I recall a friend once saying that it was a shame that music wasn't being released in stereo any more. He said this while sitting in his living room, listening to an album recorded in stereo - sitting in a chair that was right next to one of his two speakers. His notion of "stereo" was when instruments were slammed hard into one or the other of the channels, or ping-ponged back and forth between the channels - such techniques were more common in the early days of the availability of two-channel recordings. My friend didn't understand anything of the notion of recreating the original soundspace, he thought of stereo as something more like a special effect.
I think there's also a good deal of "this sounds different than I'm used to and therefore it's bad" going on. I'm not saying that all of Apple Music's "spatial audio" tracks are improvements, but I'm willing to keep an open mind. I'm not in the "music must be two-channel stereo they way god intended" camp.
Indeed, they literally have to know - and keep track of - how many times each specific track is being streamed, because they need to pay the artists and record labels per-stream.
So it's a totally different track for every song in the catalog?
That makes sense then on tracking - got it, thx
I love spatial audio in everything that's not music. Music sounds better as intended, with spatial audio off. Everything else tho, voices, talking, movies, etc, sound better with it on IMO
They have to have discrete files for SA on/off - it's a different mix of the original multitrack recordings, not some processor software that runs on your phone. If you toggle the setting on, it doesn't magically make every song be "spatial audio", that setting simply says to use a spatial audio version of the song if available, falling back to the "stereo" versions of songs if a given track is not available in (and listed in their database as being in) spatial audio.
Apple Music is a streaming service. I expect they treat the local storage as a cache - if the requested track (a specific artist/album/song in a specific format) isn't in the cache, then go download it when its requested to be played. They're not monitoring the setting on your phone, your phone is requesting an actual different file if you toggle the setting.
They're simply talking about the percentage of Apple Music subscribers whose phones have requested songs in spatial audio format. They can infer from that, that you have that setting turned on. If that news bothers you, ... uh, I have a bunch of other scary news for you.
I agree. But have found that ‘audiophiles’ don’t like you to change any part of the music at all.
For every song in the catalog in theory. In practice, I'd venture a bet that they don't have much more than a couple percent of the whole catalog available in spatial audio format at this point. But if you pick, say, the top 50 most-played albums in the catalog, and talk to their producers and artists, and get, say, a third of them to commit to remastering the albums for spatial audio (perhaps with some financial incentive), then suddenly you can get a whole bunch of people listening to at least some music in the new format.
The artists/producers incur some upfront costs for remixing, but with the potential of getting a whole lot more streams (and thus more money) if the format takes off. Especially if the public suddenly takes a fancy to it and your album is one of the first hundred or so in the new format - think of the first developers who released apps in the App Store when it first opened - many made fortunes by being in the right place at the right time. Heck, think of movies that were the first to make the leap onto DVD, or Blu-ray.
Spatial audio for music has been a big miss for me so far in most cases. One notable exception would be for the Dune soundtrack, where Hans Zimmer had early access to the Airpods Max and it shows. (And also if you make spatial audio on by default, of course you are going to have high numbers... I bet a lot of people don't even realize it's on.)
Apple's has an issue in the branding between "spatial audio" and Dolby Atmos, it's an ambiguity they usually try to avoid. It has UX impacts when you search for controls on your phone and can't find them because of the labelling, just try typing in either "spatial" or "Atmos" in Setting and you get a whole lot of nothing?! This should not be a concern for consumers.
Numbers like this are easy to game too when you have behaviors like Apple TV where it's a per app opt-out from spatial audio, and you won't find it in the global Settings either, it's in the slide out menu when you press and hold the TV button.
I first wondered, "Why does all the dialog sound like it's in a Small Room reverb setting" it destroys the stereo mix IMO.
Numbers like this are easy to game too when you have behaviors like Apple TV where it's a per app opt-out from spatial audio, and you won't find it in the global Settings either, it's in the slide out menu when you press and hold the TV button.
I first wondered, "Why does all the dialog sound like it's in a Small Room reverb setting" it destroys the stereo mix IMO.
This says absolutely nothing about AirPods versus regular headphones.Nope.
Why Your Atmos Mix Will Sound Different On Apple Music | Production Expert
In this article Edgar Rothermich gives a detailed explanation of the differences between Dolby Atmos and Apple’s Spatial Audio and all the steps you have to take to audition a Spatial Audio rendering of your Atmos mix!www.pro-tools-expert.com
All this says is that Apple is using their own Renderer for Apple Music tracks, nothing about AirPods. And it’s the Dolby Renderer if played through an Apple TV. Outside of that, nothing in here is said about playing Apple Music Atmos on AirPods versus regular headphones, because… there is no difference, outside of Head tracking.
If you were talking about Apple Music versus Amazon music, comparing streaming services, then you would be correct. But you specifically said “AirPods” use a special sauce that other headphones don’t have, which is incorrect.
Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but this entire Apple Renderer V Dolby Renderer issue has been solved with the recent logic pro update
Spatial audio worked great when watching foundation on TV+ as well. I won’t be surprised if that show was filmed specifically with spatial audio in mind.
There’s a certain elegance in consuming Apple content on Apple devices using Apple hardware (eg: streaming Apple Music on iPhone and listening via airpods). Apple’s decision to own every aspect of their infrastructure and ability to integrate hardware and software continues to pay off handsomely in spades.
There’s never been a better time to be all in on the Apple ecosystem. ?
There’s a certain elegance in consuming Apple content on Apple devices using Apple hardware (eg: streaming Apple Music on iPhone and listening via airpods). Apple’s decision to own every aspect of their infrastructure and ability to integrate hardware and software continues to pay off handsomely in spades.
There’s never been a better time to be all in on the Apple ecosystem. ?
This was my main complaint. Especially when training in the gym, I could hear the music being played overhead in the Gym. The non-formatted tracks are significantly louder.
Sorry, I meant spatial audio in general. But the issue is still valid: Engineers monitor their mixes using the Dolby Atmos Renderer. Apple Music users hear the Atmos mixes rendered using Apple's own "spatial audio" renderer.
No, Logic Pro uses the official Dolby Renderer. Apple has not integrated spatial audio rendering in Logic. Yet. (As mentioned in the article.)
Spatial sound is only great on movies, tv shows and videos not for music. I have off on Apple Music, I would much rather be able to download my Lossless catalog offline but Hey what do they care anyways
Not bothered about spatial audio, but lossless audio is amazing tho, with the correct audio setup like a good external DAC and not Bluetooth headphones... and this is why i don't use Spotify.
If you after a great DAC for not much $ check these guys out - https://hifimediy.com/product-category/dacs/
If you after a great DAC for not much $ check these guys out - https://hifimediy.com/product-category/dacs/
Spatial Audio makes a much bigger difference than lossless, especially if you have the right speaker setup. I have a dedicated home theatre setup with 5.1.4 Atmos and acoustic panels. Lossless sounds marginally better than high quality. For some songs, the difference is noticeable, for others, you really can't tell. The remastered Spatial Audio tracks are just incredible in my setup. Having said that lossless + spatial audio is a next level experience.
From my experience:
Spatial audio + AirPods = just ok
Spatial audio + car speakers = good, some songs really shine
Spatial audio + true atmos setup = incredible
Lossless + AirPods = slightly better
Lossless + car speakers = unnoticeable
Lossless + true atmos setup = slightly better
From my experience:
Spatial audio + AirPods = just ok
Spatial audio + car speakers = good, some songs really shine
Spatial audio + true atmos setup = incredible
Lossless + AirPods = slightly better
Lossless + car speakers = unnoticeable
Lossless + true atmos setup = slightly better
Last edited: