I need to import multiple ADM BWF files to compile an album. The Atmos album version must be matched exactly to the original stereo album version with regards to crossfades and track lengths. The first ADM file imports and connect the bed and all objects perfectly. My problem is, when I import the second ADM file, the first one loses all of the object connections. How do I import more than one ADM file without losing object connections?
I need to use the external Dolby Atmos renderer to do this
Do you have more info on that? In theory, Nuendo is capable of handling album sequencing for Atmos material. Itās just the erratic behaviour of itās object linking that makes it really difficult to work with
Multiple ADMs has not been needed in my workflow yet so I havenāt tried it.
However as long as you have the same exact same Atmos IO routing setup for all material you ought to be able to do this as a workaround (I have not tested but I canāt see how it wouldnāt work):
Import each ADM into a separate Nuendo project, create initial parameter events.
Create a new project and import the tracks in to it.
Move the material to the appropriate point in time.
Move the tracks to a single set of 128 channels (until you do Atmos monitoring will not work so you have to do it without hearing all at the same time).
Export / re-record as new ADM (depending on workflow).
I canāt see a reason to why this wouldnāt work.
Everything that can be set dynamically should work this way (again I have not tried it) but object automation data is no different than any other automation data when itās inside Nuendo.
Everything that is static metadata like binaural settings etc has to be the same for all material and that would require quite a bit of planning before hand.
Set up an āAlbum sequencingā template complete with an Atmos IO preset and named bed and object tracks with correct routing
Import the original stereo masters, all on one track, to serve as a timing reference for the album
Import each ADM one at a time and sort the elements into the different groups (a Near, Mid and Far set of tracks)
āTime outā the album by moving, crossfading, editing the ADM files to be in sync with the stereo masters (make sure āautomation follows eventsā is active to move metadata with the parts)
Export the new arrangement as a new set of ADMs for submission
The problem comes in with step 3. When you import a new ADM, you lose ALL the object routing of your template. So it works, itās just a lot of time wasted by having to reroute all the objects again after youāre done importing
No crossfading between Atmos songs possible at this time (so you canāt do it exactly like you can for an album) as far as I understand.
So did you try my suggested workaround above?
No reroute should be needed if you just move the tracks onto existing connected tracks, as long as you do not import multiple adms into the same project as that was where the routing was dropped right?
How would this work in a post audio for film context?
Assuming an atmos version and stereo version is done separately for each music cue by the composer and/or music mixer.
Then each cue needs to be assembled into the final post mix at re-recording stage, including both the stereo and ATMOS adm file for music and run in the same project with all the other tracks such as individual dx, foley and atmosphere layers.
If bringing in multiple adm files doesnt work how else will we do this? Especially if some of the cues cross fade
Even if we assume that one entire long running music mix adm and stereo file is made out of all the cues. Can the final music adm be imported and run with the rest of the individual tracks to create a final adm and stereo mix?
Note that it would be much more convienient to not have to make one long running adm for music so that in the final re-recording mix music can be moved around and edited a bit more.
This is just one of the problems of a licensed and propriety format masquerading as some kind of universal standard. It really limits the tools that are available to deal with it.
Even though I like Dolby Atmos (registered trade mark) - I feel very uneasy on creating content for somebody elseās licenced format. Just wait for Apple Music to drop it and invent their own - or buy it and make it Mac only
anyway - rant over - you probably want to look at this:
So far (i donāt have massive Atmos experience yet) I donāt think I would like to deal with that issue @Ben_Chase .
I prefer stereo or 7.1 stems and whatever is intended as objects separated as mono or stereo stems.
So far the best experience has been with plenty of stereo stems as this allows me to pan them depending on what the rest of the soundtrack is doing.
If itās all done In a steinberg DAW then they can just send a track archive and the panning will be there. And I will decide whiter they should be treated as stems or objects.
Unless you agree on a very specific setup and channel arrangement I donāt think itās going to be very smooth dealing with a score ADM delivery at this time.
Maybe as a score mixer you think you want to pan 50 objects and five beds/stems, thatās not going to work as it will use up way to many atmos channels
But when I mix I still need the creative mix flexibility of multiple score stem separation so basically the ADM isnāt a great format for that at this time.
Not worth trying to do an atmos mix of music separately before re-recording. Thus music atmos mix for a separate soundtrack releaseā¦ is yet another mix. And that can be compiled by Atmos Album Assembler, I was eying that off earlier too. Itās a shame Wavelab doesnt do that. I was specifically looking for that in the recent sale.
Reminded me not to get tied up in Dolby format until then final mix of both.
Iām with Elliot Scheinerā¦ Atmos is for FILM. And they are pushing it for music but it simply does not have the same impact, at least nothing has been released that makes people FEEL the damn music. It is being used by labels to SELL old music they own in yet another format. I remixed a few songs from an album I had originally mixed in Stereo over the past few months. Could not get any IMPACT. Which is what the original artists want to deliver to their fans.
iāve just completed an album with quite complex crossfades using Nuendo, while we wait (if it ever comes) for the album assembler to come to windowsā¦ Does anyone know if this is in the pipeline?
I used the bed for any crossfade audio, made a note of itās position at the crossover point and exported the interleaved audio file split at the crossfade point and added them to my projects. After joining them all using the Atmos conversion tool I imported the full ADM into Nuendo to check the joins. For some reason, some of them had a very small audio dropout between tracks, some of them were ok. Either way, it was relatively easy to smooth the crossfades and fix any glitches and re-export the ADM. In my case, it was for a blu-ray so I needed one long ADM file as well as split ADM files for digital.
All in all, a bit of a faff, a lot of waiting around and very hard drive space hungry, but it allowed me to get the crossfades working and checkedā¦
I agree that Atmos is much more suitable for media than for music. But donāt use āAtmosā as a synonym for ā3D audioā. Tha latter is f****g unbelievable for music production if used properly.
As soon as artists, producers and engineers start working with the idea and possibilities of 3D audio from the very beginning, the emotional impact can hardly be overestimated. Just a few weeks ago I had seasoned artists in the studio literally crying over their own (!) music in a full 3D mix - music they had heard hundreds of times before while composing, arranging, rehearsing, performing, recording, editing and (stereo) mixing
who knows - the dolby atmos production suite has been mac only ā¦forever. Iāve a mac set up for exactly this kind of thing.
I have huge sympathy for that view They are shoehorning into music production because they want it to become a āstandardā - a nice earner for Dolby
I agree - but all the Atmos remixers arenāt really doing this (as you say)
All the Atmos āremixersā Iāve spoken to are just trying to recreate the stereo mix but with a bit of āspaceā and then reach a new market. They arenāt being experimental or innovativeā¦on the contrary they are anxious NOT to do that !
Immersive audio of one form or another has been around for decades but hasnāt really been embraced because 99.9% of end users either donāt have the playback system to listen to itā¦or more likely donāt actually care.
In reality Apple Music is driving the adoption to Atmos (IMO) and their āspatialā implementation on the ipods is pretty bad. (IMO!) - the other consumer alternatives such as soundbars or Amazon Echo also arenāt my first choice for high quality music playback.
As I mentioned previously this is all made even more problematic because itās a proprietary format and encoding/decoding/playback all requires some kind of license payment to Dolby, which seems wrong for music on lots of levels.
Great for Dolby - Great for Record Companies trying to resell existing material in a new format - not so great for musicians (IMO!)
While I agree that Atmos and Apple and proprietary products are not a great thing, we now do have a reasonable platform (that sounds ok-ish) for new costumers to listen to āspatialisedā music (and first and foremost Film/Tv) on a portable setup.
My hope is that the quality will get better and that people will want more āspatial experiencesā outside of (home)cinema and other art venues.
Am i convinced that it will become dominant and worthwileā¦? Not yet.
ānormalā people are talking about 3d sound experiencesā¦ that is a big step forward. But itās a longgggg journey.
We would need better sounding spaces, and much of music production is done literally in the artistā home, except for some parts (drum multitrack recording, orchestral and some delicate acoustic instruments for example), along with Atmos microphones. There are a few companies who have made multi diaphragm / multi output microphones, but it is a really tiny niche. Like, TINY.
To do as you suggest requires more money. Money which simply is no longer existent in modern music production. If labels want Atmos in music as a serious thing, they need to invest in the entire production. As it is now, they just want deliverables, no more spending money in developing musicians, nor in the recording process.
I think the music industry is going to do exactly the same as it did with Quad, and then Surround (5.1): Just keep rehashing old catalog into the new format.
I do have a few friends who have been mixing old records for Atmos. As long as they keep getting paid by the labels, they will keep doing it, and doing it the way the label wants it done: Just adding ambience to a Stereo mix, to make it āAtmos.ā
I cannot do that. It is a complete betrayal of the artistās original intent, and a rip off of customers, most of whom are not educated in what Atmos is (musicians and their fans).
I am sure someone out there is making original Atmos music. It is not being picked up by large labels. They are not interested in new original music, since the 1990s.