iOS15/WWDC June 7th

Just listened to some Atmos tracks, including some from Jonathan Morrison's playlist of tracks that show off the quality, and was a bit shocked at how bad they were. Especially in direct comparison to the stereo mixes. Basics, like vocals being the most important element in a mix, and basic balancing, completely falling apart. :eek:

My reaction was 'WTF have they done to the track??', followed by 'ok, this is what it's supposed to sound like' when listening to the stereo mix afterwards.

Tried lossless as well - great.

adox

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I think they know that the amount of people that really care is insignificant. People have happily sacrificed decent quality for convenience in the past and there wasn’t much off return when decent options became available. I’d say the data requirements are off putting as well. As for spatial audio, Apple isn’t the first here and I’d put it the same bracket as 3D movies with the same long term future.

Yeah the spatial audio and Atmos is pure gimmick imo.

I do think the data thing is much less of an issue than it was in the past and of course there is offline listening. Plus I think they could pick up a lot of business from predominantly home listeners. Maybe I’m over estimating the value in it but with its on set(I know Tidal have offered it for a long time albeit at a big premium) I’ve bought my first set of wired headphones in years and have a pair of wired IEMs on the way.

I do think they have a huge selling point now over Spotify and could poach a lot of their user base if they put their mind to it. It also puts huge pressure on Spotify with their role out of lossless which I’m sure they were planning on adding a premium cost to.

You’d also have to think Tidals business model may be unsustainable in its current form.

Oafley Jones

adox wrote: »

Yep as I said in one of my previous posts. I`m surprised they havent made more of it being available at no extra cost.

I think they know that the amount of people that really care is insignificant. People have happily sacrificed decent quality for convenience in the past and there wasn’t much off return when decent options became available. I’d say the data requirements are off putting as well. As for spatial audio, Apple isn’t the first here and I’d put it the same bracket as 3D movies with the same long term future.

OU812

adox wrote: »

Yep as I said in one of my previous posts. I`m surprised they havent made more of it being available at no extra cost.

Really will put the pressure on Spotify when they eventually launch their version.

I`m on a 3 month trial with Apple Music but have a cheap Tidal account so will stick with that once the trial ends.

I dumped Spotify last week. Already had iCloud and ATV+ so it seemed like a nobrainer to go all in and get music & arcade also for less than the price of Spotify

adox wrote: »

Yep as I said in one of my previous posts. I`m surprised they havent made more of it being available at no extra cost.

I wonder will they once it comes to Android? Seemingly both Lossless and Spatial Audio are in the latest beta over there.

adox

Yep as I said in one of my previous posts. I`m surprised they havent made more of it being available at no extra cost.

Really will put the pressure on Spotify when they eventually launch their version.

I`m on a 3 month trial with Apple Music but have a cheap Tidal account so will stick with that once the trial ends.

peteeeed

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

One thing that gets overlooked on occasion is that, with all new lossless and spatial audio in addition to all the existing features, the price has not increased. Pretty good .

exactly , i'm getting losseless audio on my hifi set up , all good

One thing that gets overlooked on occasion is that, with all new lossless and spatial audio in addition to all the existing features, the price has not increased. Pretty good

adox

I tried the Dolby Atmos on Apple Music and it was awful, albeit I was listening through headphones.

The lossless and higher res stuff sounds fantastic. I really think Atmos for music is a gimmick.

i did listen to Atmos too through Tidal and through a speaker set up and again it wasnt for me at all.

With the advent of lossless streaming Ive gone back to buying wired headphones and earphones.

I have a few different sets of Bluetooth ones and I cant see them being usedd again anytime soon.

More on Spatial Audio:

First, Apple's WWDC session:

Immerse your app in spatial audio

---

Then, Ronan Chris Murphy's first look. He's a well known, established sound engineer.

----

And, an article from Protools Expert, from sound engineers, for sound engineers, with a first look of what we know so far, and what it means for the industry.

---

Takeaways:
(these are my personal opinion, not a summary of the videos..)

- when we listen to real live music, like musicians playing on a stage, everything happens in front of us. No music is coming from behind.

- the Apple video suggests 'normalising' audio - which is something audio engineers never, ever do, because it's bad, totally wrong, not good at all.

Normalising is an automatic process that looks at the loudest peak of the whole audio track, and adjusts the overall volume in relation to that. Meaning, if you have one piece of music with a really loud peak, followed by a piece with only a small peak, the second one will be much louder. You completely lose control over how loud the music is. The way sound engineers control peaks is by using a limiter - which allows complete control over the loudness, by adjusting just the peak, not the whole track.

- when engineers mix in stereo, they still have a very clear vision not only of left/right placement of sources, but also front/back. There are many ways to place an audio source, like an instrument, at a clearly defined spot in a 3-dimensional space.

- there is a fundamental difference between both listening and mixing for either a genuine Atmos/surround environment, with multiple physical speakers all around a static listening position, and binaural pseudo-surround coming out of just two speakers, like headphone speakers.

- considering re-mixing albums for genuine Atmos/multi speaker setups: this means that a mix has to be started from the ground up. With a clear mixing vision, that is, by definition, fundamentally different from the original mix.

- artists hire specific mixing engineers for their styles and vision. A mix by Andrew Scheps will sound very different to a mix of the same track by Tchad Blake. Getting the original engineers back to re-mix successful albums for Atmos is not realistic.

- the real potential for spatial audio may not be in music - where the natural environment is closer to stereo - but for AR and VR, where the natural environment is immersive, including realistic audio coming from behind

- that being said: a mix of a music track is always something that is 'unnatural', with larger than life, heavily compressed and equalised vocals with precisely controlled reverb and delay spaces, to name just one example. So from-the-ground-up surround mixes could be another form of artistic expression - deliberately creating a similarly 'unnatural' but interesting picture.

- many up and coming and independent artists either mix their own music at home, or use sound engineers that work on a small scale in small studios. Switching a mixing environment to surround is extremely expensive, not really suitable for small and home studios.

A few things I've noticed, learned and discovered with Spatial Audio/Lossless over the past couple of days.

1. It's one or the other: Spatial Audio tracks aren't lossless, and if you have SA enabled, you get the SA version. If you disable SA, you get the Lossless version.

2. Apple don't output Spatial Audio over DACs. If you use a DAC for your headphones, you won't get Spatial Audio. So the very technology you need for Hi-Res Lossless doesn't support Spatial Audio. I would hope that this will be fixed at some point - maybe it requires an OS update.

3. On the Mac, it seems to be hit and miss whether Apple Music gives you the Spatial Audio or Lossless/Hi Res version or not. There's loads of stuff I'm listening to that I know is in SA/Lossless, but when you play the track, it doesn't show the icon up in the track area, and it doesn't mention the format in the Get Info overlay. I don't see this issue on my iPhone or Apple TV.

4. Tracks that weren't available in Spatial Audio yesterday are there today, so obviously the catalogue is still being updated.

5. I've done double-blind tests (using hardware that supports 24bit/192kHZ), and I personally cannot tell really the difference between AAC and ALAC, and I certainly can't tell any difference between 24bit 48kHZ and 24bit 192kHZ. So lossless is largely lost on me, and my ageing ears. I'll be setting my devices to "Lossless ALAC up to 24bit/48kHZ", but even that is probably overkill for me.

6. While the Apple Music catalogue has plenty of Lossless at 16bit 44.1kHZ (CD quality), Hi Res Lossless is relatively few and far between, and I've yet to come across anything at 24bit 192kHZ. Not that it really matters as per point 5 above.

7. If you've a Mac and have a large music library of stuff that you ripped or owned before Apple started their streaming service, it's a pain in the arse, because it'll play that local stuff and not the Spatial Audio/Lossless versions. And there's no way to get it to bypass the local version and use the better cloud version without deleting the local version. I think I'll move my local library entirely to a backup and start fresh.

8. On my phone I deleted all locally downloaded music and started fresh downloading my playlists that I occasionally use offline. Problem is that there's a load of music I had downloaded previously that isn't available in Apple Music any more. The perils of relying on the licensing whims of a streaming service I guess. Some of it might still be up there, just under a slightly different album version, but I know some of it it totally gone.

9. I can't prove it, but Apple seemed to have done something to improve the music quality of the Apple TV 4K via a Sonos Beam. It used to be a bit meh, and you were better off playing music through the Sonos App (which sounded great). But now playing it from the Apple Music app on the Apple TV sounds fantastic (and this isn't just for Spatial Audio, or even Lossless stuff). I've seen some other comments around saying the same thing.

10. Spatial Audio sounds really great for some stuff, and weird or even bad for others. But it's mostly good, though. Most of it isn't music I'm into, so I'm looking forward to more electronic and alternative stuff being released as Spatial Audio. I think Massive Attack's Mezzanine (if done right) should sound amazing. Kraftwerk have their massive live album 3D: The Catalogue in it already, and it sounds great. Some Nine Inch Nails and Front 242 would be good too.

11. All in all I think Apple are right. Spatial Audio is going to be the main feature, and Lossless is just going to become something that is there for most tracks so that it doesn't look like Apple are skimping on "quality". Hi Res Lossless is going to remain a niche thing for the small population of people who care about such things.

Need a Username

I was just watching the iOS segment.

I see that spatial audio is coming to AppleTV later in the year. So AirPod Max it is then.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

I don't know about making electronic music.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

what you described above sounds like some faff just to use an ipad

The reason for 2. is 1.

FourFourRED

murpho999 wrote: »

Not sure how you be conclude that from the link you posted?

It shows the list of devices that support it and Mac’s aren’t on it….

And my post above that showed the press release where they announced it as a new feature of the new macOS - https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/06/macos-monterey-introduces-powerful-features-to-get-more-done/

drogon.

murpho999 wrote: »

Not sure how you conclude that from the link you posted?

Better link

https://www.theverge.com/2021/6/8/22523914/macos-tvos-spatial-audio-support-airpods-pro-max

According to a press release from Apple, spatial audio for macOS will only work with the AirPods Pro and Max on Macs with the company’s latest M1 chip and the macOS Monterey operating system. During this week’s WWDC presentation, Apple said spatial audio would arrive on tvOS sometime “this fall,” offering a “full-surround experience” and “dynamic head tracking.”

Guess it requires the neural engine

murpho999

FourFourRED wrote: »

Looks like it isn’t available and is only coming to the new MacOS MoneyPennny or whatever it’s called and requires the M1 chip - https://support.apple.com/en-ie/HT211775

Not sure how you conclude that from the link you posted?

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

then...

Haha, talk about clichéd, outdated views.

It's not an entertainment vs serious work issue.

I use a Mac for audio recording, mixing, sound creation.

In the past, I have also used an iPad, by using a synth app, sending time code to a drum machine app to keep it in sync, then sending out (camera adapter>USB MIDI) MIDI for time sync to a looper pedal (to keep guitar loops quantised), and to a Kemper Profiler amp (to automatically adjust delay effect times to tempo).

That's MIDI. Audio out of the iPad goes to an audio interface, where it's mixed with the guitar amp signal, and signal from vocal mics, synths etc, then recorded into DP9 on the Mac.

Compared to what some other musicians do with iPads, this is an extremely basic, simplistic use case...

Now, if I compare pure media consumption - I do use the iPad for that, but use the Mac significantly more for that..

Grand, like I said I don't know about making electronic music. But what you described above sounds like some faff just to use an ipad when you already own a mac (which sounds straightforward and you already own).

FourFourRED wrote: »

MacOS MoneyPennny or whatever it’s called

'Monterey' made me think of 'Monterey Pop' > Jimi Hendrix > audio features. Disappointing.

macOS MoneyPenny would be a much better name, and the first one of new, fantastic James Bond themed macOS releases:

macOS Goldfinger
macOS Moonraker
macOS Octopussy
macOS Spectre

FourFourRED

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

Spatial Audio in FaceTime calls was a specific upcoming feature mentioned in the Keynote. It’s separate to the Spatial Audio in movies or music (which is already available).

Looks like it isn’t available and is only coming to the new MacOS MoneyPennny or whatever it’s called and requires the M1 chip - https://support.apple.com/en-ie/HT211775

Spatial Audio in FaceTime calls was a specific upcoming feature mentioned in the Keynote. It’s separate to the Spatial Audio in movies or music (which is already available).

FourFourRED

Unicorn Milk Latte wrote: »

Spatial Audio is, oddly, listed under FaceTime.

Why is that odd out of interest?

Edit: it seems that they’re pushing the spatial audio on FaceTime as a bigger deal than the support for it on AirPods - maybe because it requires Mac’s with M1.

But it’s listed as an additional feature on the press release: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/06/macos-monterey-introduces-powerful-features-to-get-more-done/

Back to WWDC:

Arstechnica has released an article that mentions some new features of macOS Monterey that were not in the keynote. Nothing too exciting - some Keychain changes and new, limited cross platform capability, an automatic secure erase feature for user content,..

The full list of features is here.

It mentions Object Capture for the Mac - makes me wonder if this will be a user facing feature or app, rather than just in Xcode.

Spatial Audio is, oddly, listed under FaceTime.

Gruber reports that, interestingly, Eddy Cue predicts that the future of audio, the next big step, will not be lossless, but Spatial Audio/Dolby Atmos.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It's an extremely lazy way of looking at it. Like reading Twitter in 2017 or something.

then...

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

...
I just mean I always seen it as a media consumption device with maybe some gaming or blogging and anyone serious about what they're doing would have a Mac or a PC.
I actually always thought that someone making electronic music (or into hardcore video editing, or something hugely graphics intensive, etc) would have a massive rig of a desktop PC.

Haha, talk about clichéd, outdated views.

It's not an entertainment vs serious work issue.

I use a Mac for audio recording, mixing, sound creation.

In the past, I have also used an iPad, by using a synth app, sending time code to a drum machine app to keep it in sync, then sending out (camera adapter>USB MIDI) MIDI for time sync to a looper pedal (to keep guitar loops quantised), and to a Kemper Profiler amp (to automatically adjust delay effect times to tempo).

That's MIDI. Audio out of the iPad goes to an audio interface, where it's mixed with the guitar amp signal, and signal from vocal mics, synths etc, then recorded into DP9 on the Mac.

Compared to what some other musicians do with iPads, this is an extremely basic, simplistic use case...

Now, if I compare pure media consumption - I do use the iPad for that, but use the Mac significantly more for that..

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

The iPad (and iPhone) support USB Class compliance for Audio and midi, but not Aggregate Devices. So you can only connect one device at a time.

There may be a misunderstanding about what an Aggregate Device is.

You can use multiple audio and MIDI devices like the ones you describe with a Mac, all will work flawlessly, without setting them up as an Aggregate Device.

If you have more than one device that outputs audio (not MIDI), you can create an Aggregate Device. This is, effectively, a virtual device - you can select one output in software like Logic for the Aggregate Device, rather than having to choose between the outputs of the two separate audio interfaces.

^^ they would of course have a computer for that stuff. No one is saying the iPad will replace the Mac (or PC) for audio work or serious video editing or coding.

But there is a huge potential for it to complement these workflows.

Take the new Swift coding features announced in iPad OS 15. There’s not many developers going to code entire apps on a little iPad screen, no matter how powerful it is. They’ll want their dual screens and desktop setup.

But they will dip into the code from time to time on an iPad when the situation suits. Quickly demonstrate something in a meeting. Trying a sudden thought that comes into your head about fixing a bug on the train. This is something that Apple is implementing this year that many developers will welcome - complementing and expanding the workflow. Apple, and other software developers, are very clearly exploring the huge possibilities around “handing over” between desktop and mobile devices, not just in the consumer space (notes and browser tabs), but professional ones too.

Audio and video editing (and many other professional disciplines) are no different. You’d still do the bulk of your work on your desktop (or laptop with a desktop setup), but then be able to dip in on the iPad at appropriate times.

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I suspected you'd dismiss it out of hand, having asked for an example. Fortunately the iPad - or anything else for that matter - isn't limited by your needs, experience or lack of knowledge in a particular field.

Of course it's niche, as would most "pro" features be. I explained all that in my post. Apple have never shied away from niche. The feature I described is niche on the Mac too, yet it exists and is almost indispensable to the people that use it.

There's plenty of people - amateurs and pros - already using the iPad in various parts of their music production work flow (for all genres, not just "dance"). You might not be aware of it, but that's the truth. It's far from the "wrong thing to try it on".

No, sorry if it came off that way, I'm definitely not dismissing what you're doing on it (I don't know the genres). I just mean I always seen it as a media consumption device with maybe some gaming or blogging and anyone serious about what they're doing would have a Mac or a PC.
I actually always thought that someone making electronic music (or into hardcore video editing, or something hugely graphics intensive, etc) would have a massive rig of a desktop PC.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Exactly, they make some wonderful apps. Just not those two. The beauty is that with an open mind you can enjoy iOS along with the best apps available for it, which aren't always made by Apple. Sometimes, heaven forbid, the best option is made by "them".

While apple maps probably isn’t as good as google maps, the traffic is better on google, it’s actually pretty good. The one great feature - street view - that Google has is better on Apple maps, where available. I use both though.

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Making dance music would be an incredibly niche thing you'd imagine though. And if someone is that far into it then a tablet is probably the real wrong thing to try do it on.

I suspected you'd dismiss it out of hand, having asked for an example. Fortunately the iPad - or anything else for that matter - isn't limited by your needs, experience or lack of knowledge in a particular field.

Of course it's niche, as would most "pro" features be. I explained all that in my post. Apple have never shied away from niche. The feature I described is niche on the Mac too, yet it exists and is almost indispensable to the people that use it.

There's plenty of people - amateurs and pros - already using the iPad in various parts of their music production work flow (for all genres, not just "dance"). You might not be aware of it, but that's the truth. It's far from the "wrong thing to try it on".

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

What do people want from an iPad Pro though that it can’t do now? Are many outside the huge majority doing anything other than browsing?

Apple is selling content creation for some reason. I suppose at that price…,,

To me a Mac (or PC) is much more worthwhile.