Is surround happening in music?

[poppy]

Please don't shoot me for bringing up this topic but I want to know if I need to buy more monitors!
I'm picking up alot of comments in the business that surround is not going to become a must have for music recording and it's future is mainly in the film world. How many of you feel the pressure to move into surround?

[Paul Turpin]

I already did this (bought lots of speakers and a surround board) and - I've yet to do a single project in surround. However, I'm a believer that it will happen.....very slowly.

There are several solid releases in surround : Bjork - Vespertine (DVD-Audio)
SuperFurryAnimals - Rings Around the World (DVD-video)
as well as countless others.

Commercially - not a done deal - I think because the Creative work hasn't been done.
Creatively - lets do some great work and then things may happen. ( I know this sounds naive and dopey - so instead try "put up or shut up").

p.s. I don't really regret the purchases because :
A. my DMX-R100 is great in stereo too.
B. I needed the extra speakers while the front pair were in the shop after I blew them up! [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

[Borgbilly]

I haven't seen the ball picking up too much speed on the music front yet, but the ad business is starting to plunge in hard. I just lost a client to another studio because I can't mix TV in surround. I can almost justify the gear to mix in surround but I don't know if I will ever make my control room physically work as a surround facility.

Moving or taking a sledgehammer to the control room is absolutely not an option at this time. I have to wait until the lion's share of my clients can't live without surround. Then I'm gonna start knockin' down some walls.

[Bob Olhsson]

Surround hasn't been happening in music for anything other than the classical genre or specialist pop reissues for thirty years.

The reason is because it becomes more difficult to make multitrack pop musical balances translate between different listening environments as you increase the number of channels. Nobody has ever solved this problem and virtually no producer or promo person is willing to let the musical balance of a new title hang out to dry any more than they are willing to let a new title's levels drop below that of their competitors. I've never met one of these folks who didn't prefer mono over stereo if they didn't know which was which.

In other words, don't hold your breath for music-only surround sound unless you can get work mixing reissues of titles that have already been real money-makers in the past.

[andyo]

During college I worked as a projectionist at a movie theater - it was my opinion then, as it is now, that surround is unnatural and completely akward for film. It's even more akward for music.

I'll tell you why: I saw Spider - Man, I hear wooshing to my back left and I turn to see a man munching popcorn and an emergency exit. Not exactly the Green Goblin.

I've played in many bands and I've never heard the hi-hat swirl around me - except for that one time when I had to much to drink and I tripped over a chord and fell on the drums.

But seriously - surround sound was a great idea but uncomfortable. It ALWAYS sounds weird.

Audiences are aware of the separation that exists between them and the object. I can see a case for center, and a sub (3.1), but stuff starts flying around me I KNOW it's fake - just like those people years ago knew that Smell-O-Vision is fake.

Unless the Pot Head market demans a 7.1 re-mix of Pink Floyd I can't see surround sound ever making a huge hit in music.

Flame suit on, baby! I wish everyone would just admit that surround sound is dumb.

Andy

[Ray Fabi]

Hmm! I beg to differ. Surround while used intelligently, and with good taste is NOT akward. Putting the lead singer in the left surround channel, and the bass drum in the center channel will not translate very well, I agree, but seriously, it's just the beginning of multi channel mixing, let's give it a chance. I for one own a couple of DVD Audios, and the 5.1 cuts just blow the stereo versions out of the water. As most of us know, on most DVD Audio's, you get the choice of stereo or multi (5.1) versions. Perhaps for music, it's less of an issue than for audio visual audio content, but for film, it's amazing, again while creatively and intuitively used. You can create way more interesting sound scapes, better definition, more seperation, you have more control over placement... etc etc. I think that eventually (maybe 10 years from now, who konws?) everyone will have some sort of surround setup at home. We should get ready for that. I myself have completely changed my setup for a 5.1 and 6.1 listening environment at the studio. I even bought a n ADGIL monitor section - it's great by the way! I love to be able to assign my string sections slightly towards the back of the room, while the brasses are slightly in front and to the right (as an example), the possibilities are endless. Of course, all that has to translate well to stereo, but, that isn't so hard - it's a bit of a remix at the end which is not at all difficult.
My 2 cents

[Matt Stutter]

I think surround done well and tasteful is a great thing - movie soundtracks are done in surround and that sounds fantastic, I don't believe you'd be looking for the trumpet player in the row behind you.. You wouldn't notice it so ridiculously spread around like that!!

Sure, whizz bang effects are tiresome flying around the room (most of the time laughable).

But, recently when we were working mixing a few songs for use in a movie - the surround mixing had huge impact (all those speakers - and that dedicated sub) Never once did we look at each other and say "let's pan the drums right round us during the chorus" - there wasn't a need to say "look, we have back speakers too" - they were already doing a job without making you turn to watch them.

I agree that most homes do or will have a surround setup at home (not aligned or perfect - but they will have it).

And hey, we have two speakers now - but we don't madly pan everything around those, do we?

Then again, I work with stuff that get's viewed in surround, so what do I know.

[AEW]

Well I see your point and agree that surround is the making it's mark. Just have a look at DVD/TV surround sound home theatre packs being sold around the place.
I'm getting ready for it now. I have 5.1, just bought a G4/933 with DVD burner and a 3CCD video camcorder.

Nick

[Robotnik]

The consumer electronics giants also own the record companies. They'll sell you whatever they can think of, and you'll just keep on buying into the hype.

[MattiMattMatt]

Surround sound music requires the listener to sit on his/her butt in the middle and....DRIVE -- i.e. works best in cars.

Heard various demos of surround mixes, and commercially-released stuff -- most don't know what they're doing (backup singers or horns in the rear speakers sound disjointed).

Message from record company: don't put artist in the center speaker, naked and alone, in order to protect unauthorized use of voice.

Nile Rodgers comment -- wondering what the helll to do with the surrounds reminds him of the early days of stereo when, judging by an old Sly and The Family Stone cut in which everything was mixed mono with a tambourine panned to the other speaker, it's obvious that they similarly wondered what the helll do we do with the 2nd speaker.

-M.M.M.