Radiohead producer Nigel Godrich is unimpressed by "rubbish" Dolby Atmos music, believing that "stereo is optimum"

[What Hi-Fi?]

Producer Nigel Godrich has shared his thoughts on some of the problems with Dolby Atmos music in a new interview, saying: "I think it’s all a bit of a bluff".

Radiohead producer Nigel Godrich is unimpressed by "rubbish" Dolby Atmos music, believing that "stereo is optimum" : Read more

 

[manicm]

You get certain producers, because they've been primarily been involved with one band, who are stuck in their ways. What's good for Radiohead may not be good for others - case in point Roger Waters' Is This Really The Life We Want - I did not like the reductionist production by Godrich. He tried to pull a Rubin, and I did not really like it.

 

[Friesiansam]

I agree with Godrich, music first, not tech and, stereo is great for music. If you go to a live gig, how often are there musicians above or behind you, unless you are standing on your head and facing the wrong way?

 

[manicm]

I agree with Godrich, music first, not tech and, stereo is great for music. If you go to a live gig, how often are there musicians above or behind you, unless you are standing on your head and facing the wrong way?

But it's completely different in the studio, and there are better examples of music in Dolby Atmos, especially in classical.

 

[Commish]

There is a lot of truth in what Godrich says. Many people find it disconcerting (annoying, distracting, nauseating) to have musical instruments mixed to surround them during a performance. I do not want to sit in the middle of the orchestra, or a band during the performance, I want to have them playing in front as on a stage, while I am in the hall (with the reflected sound behind me).
The finest multi-channel music recordings I have experienced place me in an environment in which there is a natural sense of acoustic space.

 

[Sliced Bread]

So much Atmos music reminds me of early Stereo tracks where they had to *show* you they’re using stereo. Many Atmos tracks over uses the surround and height channels

*But some tracks are wonderful and use the format to create spacefor the music to breathe.

 

[Armand]

Well, when he's actually done any good work with a good band, let's hope he learns something..
What a hack.

 

[Jaybird100]

Producer Nigel Godrich has shared his thoughts on some of the problems with Dolby Atmos music in a new interview, saying: "I think it’s all a bit of a bluff".

Radiohead producer Nigel Godrich is unimpressed by "rubbish" Dolby Atmos music, believing that "stereo is optimum" : Read more

I'm going to offer an opposing view to what Nigel Godrich says. While I'm not a fan of Atmos, I do find that music in 5.1, even 4.0, is more satisfying, at least to me, than plain, vanilla stereo. When the music is recorded, anywhere from 8 to 48 tracks are used. Trying to take all those different tracks, and trying to shoehorn all those sounds into the two channels of stereo, obviously not everything is going to fit without making the end result sound cluttered. The use of additional channels can allow more of the music that was recorded to be presented to the listener. If you have a mixing engineer who's savvy at mixing for surround, along with input from the artist or group, the results can be quite satisfying. More of the recorded music can reach the listener. True, sounds don't necessarily come from behind you in a live environment, but surround can also be used to create the ambiance of a live venue, the acoustics of a concert hall, the options are many. But to dismiss surround sound for music is, in my humble opinion, very short-sighted.

 

[Sliced Bread]

…surround can also be used to create the ambiance of a live venue, the acoustics of a concert hall, the options are many. But to dismiss surround sound for music is, in my humble opinion, very short-sighted.

Agreed. IMO the very best Atmos tracks I’ve heard are those which sound like well recorded stereo tracks. The extras channels are used subtly to open the soundstage and create space for the instruments.
When done well you don’t even realise it’s Atmos.

 

[lacuna]

I do enjoy the sound from my stereo system (Marantz 8200 w/Dali Oberon) but I still prefer music in surround, even when my receiver is just upmixing the stereo recording.

 

[Jaybird100]

I do enjoy the sound from my stereo system (Marantz 8200 w/Dali Oberon) but I still prefer music in surround, even when my receiver is just upmixing the stereo recording.

Are you familiar with the Surround Master, from Involve Audio? It's the best matrix decoder/synthesizer I've ever heard. It's capable of creating a near-discrete surround effect from stereo recordings, as well as high-separation decoding of QS, SQ, EV, Dolby Surround, and Dynaquad. It can be added to any quad or home theater receiver that offers multichannel analog inputs. Check out Involveaudio.com for details about this unit. I use one, and it's the best audio purchase I've made in years.

 

[AEJim]

Can't blame the guy, he's been spoiled with his exceptionally fine stereo desktop monitors...

 

[seoman27]

Funny. "When the hammond kicks in bla bla bla"
Wasn't hammond the first who tried to throw the sound around the room with the lesley speaker?
Mono and stereo could not catch that surround sound.
Only atmos/dts:x/auro3d are the platforms that can output the lesley as it was invented in the 40'ies

 

[Sliced Bread]

Can't blame the guy, he's been spoiled with his exceptionally fine stereo desktop monitors...

This is actually a very good point. One of the advantages of Atmos is separation and soundstage. I’m sure he’s not missing that in what is presumably a state of the art set up.

 

[Richard Burki]

Rather disappointing to see that Nigel Godrich like many is stuck in his bubble - just goes to show that being a household name in one space doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're talking about in another..

Whilst I can understand the skepticism (because most immersive content is still poorly produced these days) it shows a total lack of understanding as to what recording technology has always been about and the great possibilities it presents to reimagine a musical experience outside of the confines of the real world (which is strange given that most of Radiohead's techniques in the studio are rarely about purism in the traditional sense).

Saying Stanley Kubrick mixed in mono because he preferred it is also ignorant and just straight up BS - there are articles with Leon Vitali clearly stating that they were about to mix everything in surround and that this is something Stanley was very excited about (naturally given his penchant for pushing new technology and forms of expression).

You can also absolutely get something in 5.1 to cook, or even Atmos etc - there are compressors and equipment both analog and digital that do this very well - clearly Nigel didn't bother to do much research before spewing his opinion (Just check out Galaxy Studios and their custom Neve, API and even custom multichannel outboard - they even have full mastering suites equipped with custom multi-channel EQ/Compressors etc by the likes of SPL, Millenia etc.)

As for the comment about "Rumors" by Fleetwood Mac - how does that have anything to do with Atmos?! The fact somebody made a decision to add new instruments to a mix and that choice didn't sit well with Nigel really has very little to do with the power of the medium to immerse listeners and more to do with good/bad creative decision making - certainly not "proof that it (the tech) is wrong".

For someone who "puts emphasis on music itself over studio trickery and equipment" he seems to have totally missed the point that music was never meant to be confined to the 2-dimensional world of Stereo in the first place - it was always a compromise due to the shortcomings of recording and reproduction technology at the time.

As for "sue me" - Dolby should - this is just blatant slander and perhaps Nigel should read up on topics he doesn't understand before making such statements in a public forum.

 

[rshank64]

I guess we will not be hearing Radiohead music in Atmos anytime soon! This is a real shame and very disappointing and bit annoying. I love atmos music and Radiohead music is well suited for atmos, if done properly.

This music producer guy is describing Atmos as rubbish and bit of a bluff based on one atmos recording he listened to! Very ignorant comments. Does he not know that there are good mixes and poor mixes just as in stereo mixes.

They said the same thing when stereo music first came out - it is gimmicky!
Mixing Atmos requires very different skill sets and may be this guy is not keen on learning new skill sets. He will stick to stereo because that's all he knows.

Hope Radeohead hire a new music producer - may be Steven Wilson can help!

Listening to a well produced atmos track on a properly setup system is a totally different experience and you have to experience it to know it.

 

[rshank64]

Strangely, this producer guy has unwittingly admitted that he does enjoys surround music when he talked about Rolling Stone track in a movie theatre sounding amazing!! Does he not know that music in movies is specially mixed in surround ambience specially for theatre. So all this time he has been enjoying surround music but did not know!

In fact I always sit through the end credits of any blockbuster movie I watch just for the music track. Most often it is very well mixed for room filling surround and really enjoyable. Now if you then play the same track in stereo from CD or streaming you will notice how much ambience is missing in stereo version. Check it out on your own HT and compare the same track on streaming in stereo!