The Comment That Triggered a Conversation

This blog post was sparked by a comment left on one of my YouTube videos. I recently finished an experimental animated music video called "Through the Mystic Green," which I made with generative AI for both the music and visuals. To demystify the process, I released two "making-of" videos. Under the first, an anonymous commenter wrote:

"I can't respect a man who makes an AI song."

Beyond the somewhat absurd nature of an anonymous stranger declaring their lack of respect for me, I have to admit that the comment struck a professional nerve. It was a perfect encapsulation of a widespread anxiety surrounding AI's encroachment into the creative arts. This sentiment taps into a profound fear that these tools invalidate the essence of human creativity—the struggle, the skill, the years of practice, the "soul" we pour into our work. The comment implies a violation of an unspoken social contract: that art is legitimized by a specific kind of human effort, and that using AI is, in essence, cheating or potentially even stealing.

This is not an isolated feeling. A recent report from the CREAATIF project surveyed 335 freelance creative professionals and found that 68% feel less secure in their jobs because of generative AI, and 61% perceive a decline in the perceived worth of their work. The anonymous comment was the raw voice of this professional unease.

Subscribe now

Why This Matters Beyond One Comment

As an educator in higher education, I wanted to address this sentiment directly. My primary responsibility is ensuring our students are prepared for the industries they're entering. That's the main reason why I created "Through the Mystic Green"—as an experiment to understand AI's real-world capabilities and limitations. Because you cannot teach literacy if you are not literate yourself.

The objective, therefore, was neither to produce a masterpiece, nor was it a perfunctory exercise. It was practice-based research, an experiment designed to try to push the technology to its current limits. I needed to move beyond the polarized public debate and get my hands dirty. I needed to understand the new workflows, skills, and mindset required to operate in this emerging paradigm. The result, a music video that has since received international recognition, serves as a case study I can now use to make a critical argument to my fellow educators: we must engage with this technology, even if we dislike it.

The Educator's Mandate in an Age of AI

In education, there is often a lag between industry transformation and curriculum adaptation. With generative AI, this lag is no longer a minor issue; it is a critical failure. Our personal opinions on AI are secondary to our professional mandate. We are tasked with preparing students for the world as it is becoming, not as we wish it would remain.

The data on AI's integration is unequivocal. According to the 2025 AI Index Report from Stanford University, 78% of firms used AI in 2024, up from 55% in 2023. This is not confined to the tech sector. The creative industries are at the epicenter of this disruption. Market reports project the generative AI market within these industries will expand from $4.09 billion in 2025 to $12.61 billion by 2029. To ignore a transformation of this magnitude is to commit educational malpractice.

Defining the New Literacy: Beyond Clicks and Code

This reality demands a new form of literacy. "AI Literacy" is being recognized as a core 21st-century competency that moves beyond basic digital skills. It is about developing the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to engage with AI critically, creatively, and ethically.

Global bodies like UNESCO are defining this educational priority. Their AI Competency Frameworks emphasize human-centered approaches, calling for curricula that foster critical thinking, promote ethical principles, and provide foundational understanding of how these systems work. The goal is empowering learners to navigate an AI-integrated world with confidence and purpose.

This is not the first time a technological shift has forced such pedagogical re-evaluation. The advent of the Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) in music production provides a powerful analogy. Suddenly, one could become a music producer without learning traditional instruments. Many feared this would devalue musicianship. While it lowered barriers to entry, it did not make instrumental ability obsolete. A producer who can play an instrument still holds significant competitive advantage. The DAW became a new instrument requiring new skills.

Generative AI should be viewed through the same lens. It is a powerful productivity tool that automates certain tasks and requires rethinking production workflows. But it remains just a tool. It does not replace the need for guiding human intellect, discerning artistic judgment, or deep domain-specific knowledge. If anything, it makes those human qualities more valuable.

Inside the Machine — A Case Study of "Through the Mystic Green"

To move this discussion from abstract to concrete, I want to offer a transparent deconstruction of how "Through the Mystic Green" was made. This project was my laboratory for understanding the new creative paradigm, and its process reveals far more about the future of creative work than any theoretical discussion could.

Composing with a Probabilistic Partner – The Music

The most fundamental shift generative AI introduces is the move from working with deterministic systems to collaborating with probabilistic ones. This is not merely technical; it is a profound change that redefines the relationship between creator and tools.

Traditional software is deterministic. For any given input, the system produces the same, predictable output. Click a filter, the same transformation occurs. This predictability makes the tool a reliable extension of the user's will.

Generative AI is probabilistic. It operates on statistical patterns from training data. When given a prompt, it doesn't calculate a single answer; it generates what it determines as the most probable response. The same input can produce different outputs, introducing randomness and surprise.

This transforms the creative process from monologue into dialogue. The AI becomes something akin to a collaborative partner. The creator's role shifts from master technician to director, guiding an unpredictable but talented collaborator. This requires "conversational competence"—the ability to recognize promising directions, identify elements worth preserving, and articulate modifications that steer toward desired outcomes.

My experience creating the music was a practical lesson in this paradigm. The workflow unfolded in four distinct stages:

• First came ideation and generation. I began with a concept, prompting Suno with the core idea: a mystical "hero story" of individual growth from fear to confidence. Suno served as creative catalyst, translating abstract emotional concepts into tangible musical starting points.

• Second was curation and critical judgment. After iterations, Suno produced a musically compelling version. However, the AI-generated lyrics were imperfect—at one point singing "a path ahead where dreams explode." I faced an artistic trade-off: continue generating for perfect lyrics but risk losing musical magic, or accept the lyrical flaw to preserve superior composition. I chose the latter. This decision, prioritizing one element over another, embracing imperfection for the whole, is quintessentially human creative judgment.

• Third came technical problem-solving and "happy accidents." The initial track contained subtle metallic artifacts from the diffusion process. To address this, I needed to separate the track into stems. Suno's probabilistic stem separation produced a fortunate result: it isolated nearly all artifacts onto a single synth track. This created an opportunity. I downloaded the flawed stem, edited it in Ableton, re-uploaded to Suno, and used their remastering feature. Unlike traditional remastering, Suno's version regenerates harmonic content, smoothing artifacts. This back-and-forth between human editing and AI capabilities illustrates the new problem-solving skills required.

• Finally came human-led finalization. With clean stems, I moved to Ableton for final mixing. I treated AI-generated stems as raw material, adjusting volumes, replacing weak elements like an awful crash cymbal, and layering both original and remastered synth versions for richer texture. Traditional skills remain essential for quality control and polish that elevate projects from draft to finished product.

Directing the Happy Accident – The Animation

If music creation was a lesson in collaboration, animation was a masterclass in navigating limitations and harnessing unpredictable creativity. The central challenge is consistency: current models treat every shot independently with no memory of previous frames.

My journey began with failure. I planned to replicate traditional workflow: create character sheets and style guides, then generate storyboard frames through ChatGPT. The approach failed. Generated characters were similar enough to seem related but different enough to appear jarring when animated.

This forced a workaround blending old and new techniques. I abandoned generating full frames and used Photoshop to manually composite consistent character images onto backgrounds. These became starting points for video clips. However, every clip started with the same static pose. To solve this, I generated clips longer than needed and cut off static openings, a decision with significant downstream consequences.

This led me to choose Kling 2.1 over Veo 3. Although Veo 3 generated higher-quality 8-second clips, removing static segments left only 3-5 seconds of usable footage. Kling's 10-second clips provided 6-7 seconds after trimming. This strategic decision balanced creative needs with technical limitations and budget constraints (Kling cost significantly less per clip).

The most profound lesson came from working with AI's artistic tendencies. My vision was 2D animation, but Kling consistently rendered my character in 3D. After fighting this tendency, I embraced it, adopting a new style—3D character in 2D worlds—accepting Kling as opinionated collaborator rather than compliant tool.

This led to a workflow less about executing predetermined scripts and more about curating happy accidents. The AI would deviate from prompts, but sometimes deviations were more interesting than original ideas. The story evolved organically through dialogue between my intentions and the AI's interpretations.

The most powerful example was the pivotal confidence scene. I struggled visualizing this abstract shift. I prompted simply: "the girl is becoming confident." The AI's response was poetic, her previously tied hair came undone, flowing freely in wind. This unscripted visual metaphor communicated more elegantly than what I could have explicitly described, a moment born from collaborative dance with probabilistic partner.

From Praxis to Pedagogy — Redefining Creative Education

An experiment requires external validation. "Through the Mystic Green" was selected as finalist in the Bali International AI Film Festival (BIAIFF), founded by award-winning filmmaker Ben Makinen, and was also named a semi-finalist in the Artificial Intelligence Media Festival (AIMF) in Los Angeles.

This recognition signals emerging professional standards for AI-integrated work. AIMF celebrates "the evolving relationship between human imagination and machine intelligence," while BIAIFF positions itself as "meeting point between algorithm and art." Success indicates projects meeting standards for originality, narrative strength, and thoughtful tool integration, proving these hybrid skills have tangible career value.

My experience embodies what educational theorists call "pedagogy of wonder"—positioning AI as exploration tool built on three principles: embracing uncertainty, cultivating curiosity, and fostering collaborative creation. My journey navigating probabilistic outputs, refining flawed results, and discovering happy accidents demonstrates these principles practically.

This points toward educators' new role. We must move from prohibiting AI to designing assignments mandating thoughtful use. We can structure projects requiring students to critically analyze AI content, engage in documented iterative refinement, synthesize AI elements with traditional craft, and reflect on ethical dimensions from bias to authorship.

This approach transforms AI from tempting shortcut into catalyst for critical thinking.

To Teach Literacy, One Must Be Literate

Creating "Through the Mystic Green" was essential professional development. The workflow—messy, iterative dialogue between human intention and machine probability—represents the future of creative work. Industry research shows AI managing initial stages like drafting while humans concentrate on strategy, evaluation, and refinement. My project models the hybrid skill set defining next-generation creative professionals.

This returns me to my central point. The visceral reaction to AI in arts, embodied by that anonymous comment, comes from fear—of the unknown, of replacement, of devaluation. As educators, we cannot afford that fear. We have a duty to venture into unknown territory ourselves, not as enthusiasts but as professionals. We must develop firsthand understanding of these tools' strengths and weaknesses to guide students with wisdom and foresight.

To my fellow educators: you need not become AI experts overnight. But you must begin the journey. Open the tools, write prompts, see the strange, flawed, occasionally brilliant things they produce. Engage in your own experiments and happy accidents. It's the only way to develop authentic, experience-based knowledge required for effective teaching. We cannot teach tomorrow's literacy without being literate today.

For music producers reading this: these tools offer new creative possibilities and revenue streams. The future belongs to those who master both traditional craft and AI workflows. Start experimenting now—your competitive edge depends on it.

Subscribe now

For years, producers working with Dolby Atmos have faced a fundamental challenge that many in the industry have quietly accepted as simply the way things are: the absence of a proper mastering workflow with the final polish achievable in traditional stereo work. While we've grown accustomed to having comprehensive control over stereo masters through dedicated mastering chains, the world of object-based audio has remained surprisingly limited in this regard. This gap has forced many engineers to develop workarounds or simply accept these limitations in their immersive productions.

This limitation stems from the complex nature of Dolby Atmos itself. Unlike stereo audio, where mastering processors can easily access and manipulate a simple two-channel signal, Dolby Atmos presents audio engineers with 128 channels of information, including both bed channels and object channels, each carrying not just audio data but also positional metadata that defines where sounds exist in three-dimensional space. Traditional audio plugins were never designed to understand or process this type of complex, metadata-rich signal flow.

Subscribe now

The Channel-Based Limitation Problem

Traditional DAWs and plugins operate on channel-based architectures, exchanging audio through fixed channel layouts such as mono, stereo, 5.1, or 9.1.6. While this approach has served stereo and surround production well, it presents several critical limitations for immersive audio workflows. First, the inflexibility of fixed formats cannot reflect the actual production goal of object-based audio formats like Dolby Atmos, where sounds exist as discrete entities moving through three-dimensional space rather than being locked to specific speaker positions.

The channel-based approach also proves error-prone and cumbersome because of the proliferation of different immersive formats and the varying channel orders implemented across different DAWs and plugin formats. Even experienced professionals regularly encounter confusion when working across different systems, leading to routing errors and compatibility issues that can compromise the integrity of complex immersive productions.

Enter OBAM: Object Based Audio Module

These limitations have not gone unnoticed by developers working at the forefront of immersive audio technology. Fiedler Audio, the company behind the widely adopted Dolby Atmos Composer, has recently presented a comprehensive solution to address these channel-based workflow constraints. Their OBAM standard represents a significant change in how we approach immersive audio processing.

OBAM, which stands for Object Based Audio Module, establishes a new plugin format specifically designed to overcome the fundamental limitations of traditional channel-based workflows. Unlike conventional audio plugins that receive only audio samples in fixed channel layouts, OBAM-compatible plugins receive both audio content and comprehensive metadata describing each object's position and semantic characteristics.

This metadata communication between plugin and host opens up processing possibilities that were previously unimaginable. An OBAM-compatible compressor, for instance, could react to gain reduction based not only on the audio content but also on where that audio exists in space. The standard eliminates the confusion of channel order variations across different DAWs and plugin formats, as each object carries its defined spatial position as inherent metadata.

Perhaps most intriguingly, OBAM enables position itself to become both a source and destination for processing. Imagine delay processors that adjust their timing based on incoming object positions, or envelope followers that generate positional metadata from audio analysis to modulate other objects' spatial placement. The technical implementation allows for dynamic processing decisions that consider not just the sonic characteristics of the material, but its three-dimensional context within the mix.

Practical Implications for Production Workflows

The first implementation of OBAM appears in Fiedler Audio's own Dolby Atmos Composer, where OBAM plugins can be hosted in the Master Channel. This integration allows producers to process their entire Dolby Atmos mix or selected portions with object-aware capabilities, addressing one of the most significant workflow limitations that immersive audio producers have faced since the format's introduction.

From a practical standpoint, OBAM transforms the production process by introducing true object-based mastering capabilities. Previously, any processing applied to a complete Dolby Atmos mix required either rendering the project to individual channel files for external processing or accepting the limitations of channel-based plugins that couldn't understand the broader spatial context. With OBAM, dynamic processing can now be applied intelligently across the entire sound field, with processors understanding the distinction between bed channels providing foundational ambience and discrete objects requiring different treatment.

The ability to apply mastering-grade processing within the production environment itself has the potential to fundamentally change how we can approach both the creative and technical aspects of immersive audio. This contextual awareness allows for more sophisticated approaches to managing the relationship between direct sounds and their spatial environment, while maintaining the object-based nature of the production throughout the entire workflow.

The Broader Impact on Immersive Audio

The introduction of OBAM represents more than just a technical advancement; it signals a maturation of the immersive audio production ecosystem. Fiedler Audio has made the OBAM SDK available to third-party plugin developers free of charge, encouraging widespread adoption and innovation within the plugin development community. This open approach suggests that we may see a rapid expansion in the number of available OBAM-compatible processors as developers recognize the creative and technical possibilities offered by object-aware processing.

As object-based audio formats continue to gain adoption across music, film, and gaming applications, the availability of sophisticated processing tools becomes increasingly critical for the format's continued growth and artistic development. Perhaps most significantly, OBAM's object-based approach provides future-proofing capabilities that channel-based workflows lack. When producers work with object-based production methods, they maintain the ability to adapt their content to new reproduction formats as they emerge, without requiring fundamental changes to their production methodology. This flexibility proves essential for content distribution and technological evolution in an rapidly advancing field.

This advancement also has implications for how we train the next generation of audio engineers. With proper object-based mastering tools now available for immersive formats, educational programs can begin teaching comprehensive workflows that mirror the depth and sophistication students expect from traditional stereo production techniques. The gap between what's possible in conventional audio production and what's achievable in immersive audio continues to narrow, making object-based production more accessible to a broader range of practitioners.

A New Chapter for Object-Based Audio

Fiedler Audio's development of the OBAM standard addresses a fundamental limitation that has constrained immersive audio production since its inception. By enabling metadata communication between plugins and hosts, this new standard allows for the development of processing tools that truly understand and enhance the three-dimensional nature of object-based audio. For producers who have been working within the constraints of traditional channel-based architectures, OBAM represents a significant step forward in achieving the level of control and refinement we've long sought in immersive audio production.

The availability of the OBAM SDK at no charge to plugin developers suggests strong potential for ecosystem growth and innovation. As more OBAM-compatible processors become available, we can expect to see increasingly sophisticated approaches to immersive audio processing emerge. This development not only improves the technical quality achievable in current productions but also opens creative possibilities that will undoubtedly influence how we conceive and create spatial audio experiences in the future.

If you'd like to see OBAM in action and learn more about how this technology works in practice with specific plugins and production techniques, I've created a detailed demonstration on my YouTube channel that walks through setting up and using OBAM-compatible processors in a real production scenario.

Subscribe now

The world of podcasting has exploded over the past decade, growing from niche hobbyist content to a mainstream medium consumed by millions daily. While production values have certainly improved, the fundamental audio approach remains largely unchanged: mono or basic stereo recordings of voices, occasionally enhanced with background music or sound effects. But what if podcasts could transport listeners into truly immersive sonic environments? What if the medium of audio storytelling could leverage the full potential of spatial audio technologies?

Subscribe now

Beyond Left and Right: The Case for Spatial Audio in Podcasting

When we think about spatial audio, our minds often jump to music production or film soundtracks. The conversation rarely extends to spoken-word content, despite storytelling being fundamentally about creating environments and spaces. This disconnect represents a significant missed opportunity.

Traditional stereo podcasting allows producers to pan voices left and right, but this approach lacks dimension. In a recent interview I conducted with twice Grammy-nominated audio engineer Ryan Schwabe for an upcoming video on my YouTube channel, he offered a fascinating perspective on this limitation. Schwabe noted that simply panning voices to opposite sides doesn’t create the genuine feeling of sitting between two people in conversation. The listener doesn’t naturally perceive the distance between speakers, the height of the room, or the subtle acoustic properties that our brains process in real-world listening situations.

While skilled engineers can simulate some spatial characteristics in traditional stereo through careful application of early reflections and reverb, these techniques only approximate true spatial positioning. Formats like Dolby Atmos take a fundamentally different approach. Rather than relying on psychoacoustic tricks to simulate dimensionality, Dolby Atmos represents sound as three-dimensional objects with precise spatial coordinates.

This direct representation of sound in 3D space creates a more accurate and immersive listening experience that better matches how we naturally perceive sound in the real world. The format handles the complex rendering of these spatial objects to whatever speaker or headphone configuration is available, resulting in more intuitive spatial relationships between sounds.

Reimagining Podcast Formats Through Spatial Dimensions

Considering spatial audio for podcasting requires us to think beyond conventional podcast formats. The opportunity isn’t merely to enhance existing approaches, but to reimagine what podcasting can be.

Take, for instance, the potential for actual movement within a podcast. Traditional podcasting emphasizes stationary speakers maintaining consistent microphone positions for optimal clarity. However, certain podcast formats, particularly those involving physical demonstrations, games, or multiple participants, could benefit tremendously from capturing natural movement and spatial relationships.

Role-playing game podcasts like those featuring Dungeons & Dragons sessions present a perfect example. Imagine hearing players physically move around a table as their characters navigate different scenarios, or perceiving the spatial relationship between a game master and players during a critical moment. The added dimension would enhance narrative clarity while creating a more engaging listening experience.

Similarly, interview podcasts recorded in meaningful locations could capture the ambience and spatial characteristics of environments that hold significance to the conversation. A discussion about architecture would feel more impactful if recorded in the building being discussed, with the acoustics of the space becoming part of the narrative itself.

The Technical Reality: Making Spatial Audio Accessible

Recording high-quality spatial audio used to require specialized knowledge and equipment prohibitively expensive for most podcasters. The technical barriers meant that immersive audio production remained largely confined to professional studios with dedicated engineers.

But modern portable solutions like the Nomono Sound Capsule are changing this paradigm by offering simplified workflows specifically designed for content creators without extensive audio engineering backgrounds. The device combines spatial microphone arrays with wireless lavalier microphones in a portable package, allowing podcasters to capture both voices and ambient environments with spatial accuracy.

What makes this technology particularly impressive is how it reconstructs the precise position of each sound source by analyzing the minute differences in how audio reaches each microphone in the array, not unlike how GPS triangulates location. The system’s recently added AI algorithms process these subtle timing and phase differences to create accurate spatial coordinates for each voice, auto-generating a complete Dolby Atmos masterfile with all positional data included and ready for playback or further editing.

This automated processing effectively removes the technical barriers that previously prevented many content creators from working with spatial audio formats.

However, every technological advancement involves certain tradeoffs. For podcasters considering spatial audio solutions, it’s important to understand that while these systems excel at capturing the spatial positioning of voices and ambient sounds—exactly what storytellers need—they may not always match the pristine audio quality of traditional studio setups with dedicated voice microphones.

This doesn’t diminish their value for narrative content, where spatial relationships often matter more than audiophile-grade fidelity. In fact, some forward-thinking podcast producers are developing interesting hybrid approaches: using spatial recording systems to capture the authentic positioning and movement of speakers while simultaneously recording key voices with traditional microphones. This approach preserves the spatial storytelling elements while maintaining the vocal clarity listeners expect from professional podcasts.

Crafting Experiences for the Listener’s Mind

The most compelling argument for spatial audio in podcasting isn’t technical but experiential. Audio storytelling inherently asks listeners to create mental imagery based on what they hear. By providing more spatial information, we enhance the listener’s ability to construct these mental scenes accurately.

When a listener hears a conversation in true spatial audio, their brain more easily places speakers in a virtual environment. Background sounds gain context through proper placement, creating a more complete mental picture. The subtle cues of room acoustics add emotional texture that flat recordings simply cannot convey.

This enhanced spatial awareness also improves cognitive processing. Research suggests that our brains process spatially distinct audio sources more efficiently than overlapping ones. In complex podcasts with multiple speakers, spatial separation could improve comprehension and reduce listening fatigue.

The Future of Auditory Storytelling

Looking ahead, integrating spatial audio into podcast production offers exciting possibilities for creators. Interactive podcasts could allow listeners to explore sonic environments from different perspectives. Documentary-style podcasts could recreate historical spaces with archaeological accuracy. Educational content could leverage spatial positioning to clarify complex concepts through auditory demonstration.

As mobile devices increasingly support spatial audio playback through earbuds capable of head tracking, the audience for immersive podcasts grows daily. Most listeners already have the hardware needed to experience spatial audio content—they’re simply waiting for creators to produce it.

What’s particularly interesting is how this technology hasn’t been more rapidly adopted for storytelling formats. During my upcoming interview with Ryan Schwabe, he expressed surprise that companies like Apple prioritized spatial audio for music rather than for narrative formats like podcasts and audiobooks, where spatial characteristics could arguably add even more value to the listener experience.

The Space Between Words

The power of podcasting has always lived in its intimacy; the feeling of direct connection between creator and listener. Spatial audio doesn’t diminish this intimacy, but enhances it by removing the artificial constraints of traditional recording methods. It allows for more natural communication patterns, complete with the subtle spatial cues our brains have developed to process.

For podcast creators looking to distinguish their content in an increasingly crowded landscape, spatial audio offers both technical and creative advantages. The barrier to entry is lower than ever, with new tools making spatial recording accessible to creators without specialized training.

The future of podcasting likely lives somewhere between traditional approaches and fully immersive experiences, with creators selecting the appropriate level of spatial complexity for their specific content. What’s certain is that the dimensional possibilities of spatial audio offer podcasters new ways to engage listeners and tell more compelling stories.

Subscribe now

If you’re interested in finding out more about the Nomono Sound Capsule and how it approaches spatial audio for content creators, check out my YouTube video below. Also, don’t forget to subscribe to my YouTube channel for the upcoming interview with Ryan Schwabe, where we dive deeper into the future of audio production and its applications across different media formats.

The most vital tool for any music producer isn’t found in a rack or software suite—it’s our ears. Yet, for many of us, high-frequency hearing loss from years of exposure to loud sounds or simply the natural aging process creates a silent struggle that affects our work. What happens when a producer’s most essential instrument begins to fail them? Until recently, the options were limited and often inadequate for creative audio work. Today, however, innovative technology is changing this narrative, bringing new possibilities for those who feared their mixing days might be numbered.

Subscribe now

The Hidden Challenge in the Studio

Most noise-induced hearing loss begins with a subtle dip in high frequencies, typically around 3-6 kHz—precisely the range crucial for clarity in music. A producer with this common pattern might inadvertently boost certain elements too much, creating mixes that sound harsh to listeners with normal hearing. These translation issues often stem from the mixer’s personal hearing profile affecting their decisions.

For years, the industry response to hearing issues has been largely avoidance and silence. Few professionals openly discussed their hearing challenges, fearing it might cast doubt on their abilities. However, this stigma is gradually lifting as notable figures begin to speak up. Gregory Scott of Kush Audio has candidly discussed mixing with imperfect hearing, encouraging others not to feel shame about it. Even legendary figures like Beatles producer Sir George Martin experienced significant hearing loss in later years, yet continued to produce remarkable work.

The traditional path for addressing hearing loss—visiting an audiologist for a clinical test followed by potentially receiving hearing aids—presents significant limitations for audio professionals. Standard audiologist tests typically focus on a limited frequency range (250 Hz to 8 kHz) designed primarily for speech comprehension. Meanwhile, conventional hearing aids prioritize speech clarity through compression and frequency emphasis that can distort the nuances essential for music production.

New Technologies for the Creative Ear

Recent innovations have emerged specifically for producers and audio creators, focusing not on general environmental hearing but on allowing them to hear their music accurately despite hearing deficiencies. Two particularly promising approaches are transforming how professionals with hearing loss work: software-based hearing correction like Altitude Audio’s FullScale and ARIA Studio, and consumer tech repurposed for hearing assistance, such as Apple’s AirPods Pro 2 in Hearing Aid mode.

Altitude Audio’s FullScale Test and ARIA Studio

The FullScale Hearing Test from Altitude Audio represents a significant advancement over traditional audiograms for music professionals. Unlike clinical tests that typically examine a limited frequency range in octave bands, FullScale maps your hearing across the entire audible spectrum (125 Hz to 20 kHz) with remarkable precision, testing up to 37 discrete frequencies.

This self-administered mobile app test requires calibrated headphones and takes roughly 15-20 minutes to complete. The resulting detailed hearing profile becomes the foundation for ARIA Studio—a standalone application and DAW plugin that acts as a corrective lens for your ears during production.

ARIA Studio works by importing your FullScale hearing profile and applying a corrective EQ tailored precisely to your hearing deficits. If your test showed a 10 dB loss at 6 kHz in your right ear, ARIA will boost exactly that frequency by that amount in the right channel only. The technology employs sophisticated high-resolution FIR filters with up to 16k taps for extremely precise correction, along with dynamics processing, to prevent clipping when boosting weak frequencies.

What makes ARIA particularly innovative is how it integrates with the creative workflow. As a plugin on your master bus or as a system-wide processor, it allows you to mix with your hearing corrected in real-time. You hear what you’ve been missing without having to compensate by cranking volumes or overcooking certain frequency bands. Moreover, it lets you load multiple profiles—you could audition your mix through a client’s hearing profile or a generic profile for an older listener, ensuring your work translates across different hearing abilities.

During my testing of ARIA Studio for my YouTube channel, I experienced firsthand how transformative this technology can be. The software revealed nuances in music that had been previously obscured to me, particularly in the higher frequencies where subtle production details live. This wasn’t just technically impressive—it demonstrated the practical impact these tools can have for audio professionals working with hearing limitations.

Apple AirPods Pro 2: Consumer Tech Meets Hearing Assistance

Apple’s late 2024 update to iOS 18 introduced a feature that blurs the line between consumer audio and assistive technology. With a pair of AirPods Pro 2, users can now perform a built-in hearing test on their iPhone and then activate a Hearing Aid mode on the earbuds, effectively turning them into an FDA-cleared software-based hearing aid.

The process is remarkably straightforward: access the AirPods section in iPhone settings, select “Take a Hearing Test,” and follow the prompts. After measuring your hearing thresholds, you can enable either full Hearing Aid mode (which amplifies ambient sound to compensate for your specific hearing profile) or Media Assist (which applies your hearing compensation only to media playback without necessarily amplifying environmental sounds).

For producers with mild-to-moderate hearing loss, Media Assist offers an intriguing option. Imagine working on a track in your DAW with AirPods Pro 2, having your personal hearing profile applied to everything you’re hearing. The convenience factor is significant—no additional software or hardware required if you already own the earbuds.

The subtle, socially acceptable nature of AirPods also addresses the stigma issue: wearing them throughout a session appears completely normal to observers, yet provides crucial hearing assistance. This invisible benefit has made it easier for me to incorporate hearing help into my workflow without drawing attention to a condition I might otherwise prefer to keep private.

Adapting to Hearing Changes: Perspectives from the Field

What’s particularly encouraging about these technological advances is how they complement the wisdom shared by professionals who have already adapted to hearing loss. Gregory Scott emphasizes that mixing is as much about the brain as the ears—once you understand your hearing profile, you can work around it using multiple cues, including visual analyzers and the feel of the music.

Another legendary case is Beach Boys mastermind Brian Wilson. Deaf in his right ear since childhood, Wilson simply couldn’t perceive stereo width. Rather than let that stop him, he leaned into the constraint and produced Pet Sounds and other classics in mono, insisting every element work through a single speaker.

Legendary guitarist Steve Lukather has spoken about using professional hearing aids specifically tuned for music, with settings that preserve the wide frequency response and natural dynamics crucial for studio work. These accounts demonstrate that hearing issues need not end a creative career; they simply require adaptation.

The community aspect is equally important. As more professionals openly discuss their hearing challenges, collective knowledge grows about effective adaptations. Online forums now host threads where engineers share tips for mixing with hearing loss—from simple tricks like consistently mixing at lower volumes to using reference tracks as a calibration tool.

Practical Steps for Audio Creators

Whether you’re currently experiencing hearing changes or simply want to protect your audio future, several practical approaches emerge from this technological landscape:

• First, get to know your hearing. The FullScale test offers a music-specific mapping that can reveal subtle issues a standard audiogram might miss. Even if you believe your hearing is perfect, understanding your baseline helps you track any changes over time.

• Second, consider implementing corrective technologies in your workflow. If you’re experiencing high-frequency loss, tools like ARIA Studio can help ensure you’re making mix decisions based on what’s truly in your audio rather than what your impaired hearing perceives. For more casual work or on-the-go production, AirPods Pro 2 with Media Assist might provide sufficient correction, as I’ve found in my own experiments.

• Third, adopt protective habits. Monitor at safe levels (around 85 dB SPL for an 8-hour session), use high-fidelity earplugs at concerts or when recording loud sources, and take frequent breaks to allow your auditory system to reset. These practices not only prevent further damage but often lead to better mix decisions—a lesson I wish I’d learned earlier in my career.

Finally, be open with collaborators. Transparency about using hearing correction tools builds trust and normalizes the reality that many of us audio professionals work with some degree of hearing limitation.

The Future of Hearing in Music Production

Looking ahead, we’re likely entering an era where personalized hearing profiles become standard components of the audio production chain. Just as room correction software compensates for acoustic challenges, ear correction technology adjusts for the variations in our hearing apparatus.

These innovations do more than enable continuing careers—they expand accessibility in audio production broadly. Older engineers with a lifetime of wisdom can continue contributing despite age-related hearing changes. Younger producers with congenital hearing issues can enter the field with confidence that their condition can be effectively managed.

As immersive audio formats like Dolby Atmos continue to gain prominence, hearing acuity across the full frequency spectrum becomes even more crucial. Spatial mixes rely on subtle cues that can be missed with even minor hearing deficits. Technologies like ARIA Studio and AirPods Pro’s Hearing Aid feature may prove essential for creating truly translatable immersive experiences.

The tools we’ve explored represent just the beginning of this transformation. As hearing technology advances further, the stigma around hearing loss in creative fields will likely continue to diminish. Perhaps most importantly, these innovations remind us that the core of great production isn’t perfect ears—it’s musical sensitivity, technical knowledge, and creative vision, all of which remain accessible regardless of hearing challenges.

As a technology educator exploring these innovations, I’ve been struck by how they represent more than just technical solutions—they’re changing the conversation about accessibility in creative fields. These tools remind us that technological advancement is most meaningful when it opens doors for people to continue doing what they love, regardless of physical limitations.

Subscribe now

To see a detailed demonstration of the FullScale hearing test and ARIA Studio in action, watch my full video tutorial here:

For insights on using AirPods Pro 2 as hearing assistance during production, check out my companion video:

Share

When approaching immersive audio production, particularly in Dolby Atmos, it's easy to become overwhelmed by the expanded creative possibilities. The transition from crafting a balanced stereo field to designing a fully three-dimensional soundscape requires not just technical knowledge, but a fundamental shift in our mixing philosophy. After spending considerable time researching various approaches, I've identified three particularly crucial considerations that separate technically competent Atmos mixes from truly compelling immersive experiences.

Subscribe now

1. The Subtle Art of Center Channel Management

Perhaps counterintuitively, the dedicated center channel in Atmos music mixing requires a more delicate touch than one might initially assume. Unlike film sound, where dialogue firmly anchors to the center speaker, music operates under different perceptual principles. When working with vocals—often the most important element in a mix—it's tempting to place them exclusively in the center channel for apparent focus and stability. However, this approach frequently results in a curiously isolated, narrow vocal presentation that lacks the natural width we've come to expect.

In stereo listening, lead vocals typically exist as phantom center images, emanating equally from left and right speakers to create a perceived center presence. This approach naturally imparts a certain width and dimensionality that can be compromised when restricted to a single physical speaker. I've found that the most effective approach typically involves creating a thoughtful blend—utilizing some center channel content for stability while simultaneously spreading the vocal across the left and right front speakers to maintain familiar width and fullness.

This balance varies considerably by genre and production style. A sparse acoustic recording might benefit from a center-weighted vocal presentation, while a dense rock arrangement often requires more phantom center contribution to prevent the vocalist from feeling disconnected from the instrumental backing. Some engineers even avoid the dedicated center entirely for lead vocals, preferring the traditional phantom center approach from stereo. The key insight is to approach center channel usage as a creative mixing decision rather than defaulting to rigid placement conventions. Trust your ears and consider how the center channel deployment serves the emotional intent of the music.

2. The Height Dimension: Reserved for Ambience

The overhead speakers in an Atmos configuration represent perhaps the most dramatic departure from traditional stereo mixing, yet they paradoxically benefit from the most restrained approach. Our perception of sounds from above has been shaped by evolutionary experience, and certain audio content simply feels unnatural when positioned overhead. Consider what sounds typically originate from above us in natural environments: rainfall, thunder, birds in flight, or the reverberant characteristics of large spaces. These sounds share common qualities—they tend to be ambient, diffuse, and environmental rather than direct sources.

When we place dry, close-microphone recordings directly in height channels—whether vocals, brass instruments, or percussive elements—the result often feels disorienting or artificially imposed. The height dimension works most effectively when reserved for elements that naturally extend the vertical space: room ambience, reverb tails, atmospheric textures, and spatial effects. This doesn't preclude occasional melodic content in the heights, but such elements typically benefit from some degree of diffusion or ambient treatment before elevation.

I've experienced particular success using the height channels to expand reverberant spaces, creating vertical extensions of existing environments rather than introducing entirely new elements overhead. For instance, slightly widening a vocal reverb into the height channels can create a gorgeously enveloping sense of space without drawing undue attention to the technique itself. The goal is to craft an immersive experience that feels natural and enhances the emotional impact of the music, rather than showcasing the technological capabilities of the format through conspicuous overhead placement.

3. Disciplined LFE Management

The Low Frequency Effects channel—the ".1" in formats like 5.1.2 or 7.1.4—represents one of the most commonly misunderstood aspects of Atmos mixing. This dedicated subwoofer feed isn't simply a bass channel, but rather a specialized pathway for low-frequency extension and enhancement. In film mixing, the LFE serves distinctive moments like explosions or massive footfalls. For music, its implementation requires considerably more nuance.

The foundation of healthy LFE usage rests in treating it as a complementary element rather than a primary bass carrier. Core bass content—whether bass guitar, kick drum, or synthesized low-end—belongs primarily in the main channels of your mix. The LFE should provide extension and impact only where specifically beneficial, typically filtered quite strictly below 80-120Hz to prevent mid-bass congestion and focus the subwoofer on reproducing the deepest, most visceral frequencies.

A simple but effective test I regularly employ: can I mute the LFE channel and still maintain a full, balanced mix with appropriate bass response? If removing the LFE renders the mix thin or anemic, I've likely over-relied on it. This principle becomes particularly important when considering that many listeners won't have subwoofer systems, making it essential that the main channels carry all fundamental bass information.

Some production workflows benefit from creating dedicated LFE content by filtering and enhancing specific low-end components solely for that channel. Others prefer selective LFE deployment only during pivotal musical moments where additional sub-bass impact would intensify the emotional experience. The guiding principle remains intentionality—the LFE channel should serve a deliberate purpose in enhancing your mix rather than functioning as a default repository for all bass content.

Restraint as a Creative Force

These three considerations—center channel management, height channel ambience, and disciplined LFE usage—share a common thread: the importance of thoughtful restraint in immersive mixing. The expanded capabilities of Dolby Atmos don't necessitate filling every available speaker with direct sound. Rather, they provide an opportunity to create more nuanced, emotionally resonant experiences through judicious technical choices.

The most compelling Atmos mixes I've encountered don't draw attention to their spatial distribution but instead use dimensionality to serve the musical intention. They create environments that enhance the listening experience while maintaining the fundamental connection between the audience and the performance. As we collectively explore this evolving format, I find myself continually returning to these principles as touchstones for meaningful immersive production.

Subscribe now

If you're interested in exploring additional mixing strategies for Dolby Atmos, I've compiled seven more professional techniques in my accompanying video. These expanded insights cover everything from maintaining punch and dynamics to creating purposeful motion in your immersive productions. Watch the full tutorial to deepen your understanding of effective Atmos workflows.

When Waves recently released their Immersive Wrapper plugin, I approached it with skepticism. The $250 price tag for a tool that essentially transforms mono Waves plugins into multi-channel processors seemed excessive, particularly given my reservations about Waves’ business practices over the past couple of years. Yet after spending time with the Immersive Wrapper, I’ve found myself reconsidering its place in the immersive audio production landscape, particularly for its approach to one of our most persistent challenges: the relationship between objects and beds in Dolby Atmos.

Subscribe now

The Object-Bed Relationship

The Immersive Wrapper’s most intriguing feature isn’t immediately obvious when you first launch the plugin. Hidden behind its clean interface is a sophisticated approach to group linking that addresses a fundamental challenge in object-based audio production.

When working with object-oriented formats like Dolby Atmos, we’re essentially navigating two parallel worlds: the foundational bed that creates our ambient soundscape and the discrete objects that dance throughout our three-dimensional space. What’s fascinating is how these elements need to interact cohesively while maintaining their distinct identities and functions.

In traditional stereo or even 5.1 surround productions, we’ve become accustomed to treating our audio as a unified entity. Every element lives within the same dimensional constraints. But immersive audio challenges this paradigm–suddenly we’re orchestrating elements that operate on completely different principles.

Most processing tools available to us today weren’t designed with this duality in mind. They were conceived for channel-based workflows, where each channel receives identical processing or, at best, offers basic linking options. This creates a significant disconnect when we try to maintain sonic coherence between beds and objects in Atmos productions.

The Group Linking Innovation

The Immersive Wrapper’s approach to this challenge reveals itself in its global grouping functionality. During my testing, I discovered how the plugin allows you to link multiple instances across different channel configurations—effectively creating a bridge between your bed and object processing.

Consider a situation where you’ve crafted the perfect compression settings for your 7.1.4 bed using the Immersive Wrapper with an SSL compressor. In conventional workflows, applying those same settings to objects would require either duplicating settings across multiple instances with tedious precision or accepting subtle inconsistencies in your mix. The Immersive Wrapper elegantly solves this by allowing stereo instances on object tracks to respond to specific speaker groups from your bed.

A particularly clever aspect of the Waves implementation is its consideration of how object placement affects their processing. Using the plugin’s group selectors, an object positioned primarily in the height plane can receive processing aligned with the height channels of your bed, while an object panning through the surround field can maintain sonic compatibility with surround bed channels.

This relational approach represents a significant paradigm shift in how we conceptualize audio processing. Rather than thinking in terms of individual channels or elements, the Immersive Wrapper encourages us to envision a cohesive three-dimensional space where processing is determined not just by content, but by spatial positioning. The four selector buttons in the stereo instance—enabling you to link object processing to fronts, surrounds, LFE, or heights—create an intuitive spatial relationship between otherwise disparate mix elements.

The Ecosystem Limitation

Despite its innovative approach to the object-bed relationship, the Immersive Wrapper is constrained by a significant limitation: it only works with other Waves plugins. This constraint highlights a broader challenge in the immersive audio domain–ecosystem lock-in.

Professional engineers often find themselves committed to specific toolsets and workflows that have served them well in stereo and surround production. The transition to immersive formats shouldn’t require abandoning these familiar tools, yet the reality is that immersive audio production often forces us into new ecosystems. The Immersive Wrapper exemplifies this tension—while offering an elegant solution to a complex problem, it simultaneously deepens dependence on the Waves ecosystem.

When evaluating this plugin, I weighed its capabilities against this ecosystem constraint. The ideal immersive audio tool would bridge ecosystems rather than create new walled gardens, allowing engineers to leverage their existing expertise and preferred processing chains while extending functionality into the immersive domain. Had the Immersive Wrapper worked with any VST plugin, its $250 price tag would feel more justified.

For hobbyists and smaller studios beginning their immersive audio journey, this ecosystem question becomes even more critical. The investment required for comprehensive immersive workflows can be substantial, making it essential that new tools offer value and flexibility proportionate to their cost. The Immersive Wrapper’s pricing structure—available only as a standalone purchase or through Waves’ Ultimate subscription tier—makes it a significant investment decision that extends beyond the plugin itself to a commitment to the broader Waves ecosystem.

A Specialized Tool for a Select Audience

The Waves Immersive Wrapper points toward an exciting future for immersive audio processing. Its approach to the bed-object relationship, particularly the intelligent linking between different channel configurations, represents a significant step forward in immersive mixing workflows. As this technology evolves, I expect we’ll see even more sophisticated approaches that build upon these concepts.

The capability to create custom groupings that respond intelligently to spatial positioning—as shown in the Immersive Wrapper’s user-defined groups—hints at more advanced possibilities ahead. Imagine processing that automatically adapts as objects move through different regions of your immersive space, maintaining consistent sonic character while respecting the spatial integrity of your mix. The Waves implementation offers a glimpse of this potential, even while remaining constrained by its ecosystem.

For now, the Immersive Wrapper presents a compelling option for specific user groups. If you already have the Waves Ultimate subscription, the plugin represents genuine added value for immersive production. Similarly, professionals deeply invested in the Waves ecosystem will find its workflow enhancements to justify the investment. However, hobbyists or those working across multiple plugin ecosystems might find better value in more flexible alternatives like Red Rock Sound’s immersive audio plugins, which offer similar functionality at a lower price point.

Watch the full video review of Wave’s Immersive Wrapper plugin here:

Subscribe now

The landscape of immersive audio continues to develop rapidly, transforming how we approach sound design, mixing, and mastering. As someone deeply immersed in spatial audio workflows, I often receive questions about which tools I consider indispensable. After recently setting up a new MacBook, I reflected on exactly which plugins earned their place in my initial installation—those I simply cannot work without for creating immersive experiences.

Subscribe now

These plugins represent my essential starting point for any immersive audio production environment. While I inevitably add many more plugins over time—often because I need them specifically for tutorial videos—these five form the core toolkit I would rely on even if I weren’t creating educational content. They are the foundation I build upon, the tools I reach for first, and the ones I would recommend to anyone serious about immersive audio production.

The Foundation of Immersive Audio Production

When approaching spatial audio production, particularly Dolby Atmos, having the right tools can dramatically streamline your workflow while enhancing creative possibilities. In this domain, specialized plugins truly define our production capabilities, directly affecting both technical outcomes and creative potential.

From my extensive collection, five immersive audio plugin suites have proven themselves indispensable. These are the tools I install immediately on any new system, forming the foundation of my spatial audio toolkit.

1. Audio Brewers Ambisonic Suite

At the core of any ambisonic workflow sits the need for flexible encoding and decoding capabilities. Audio Brewers provides what I consider the most flexible and reliable set of ambisonic tools available. When setting up a new system, I immediately install their encoder, decoder, rotator, and visualizer plugins.

What makes these tools particularly valuable is their remarkable flexibility—they can process multi-channel audio and convert it into ambisonics up to 7th order. The encoder handles input conversion seamlessly, while the decoder provides multiple output options, including binaural rendering for headphone monitoring.

The Audio Brewers suite stands out not only for its technical capabilities but also for the responsive development behind it. The developer continuously enhances the ecosystem with innovative tools like specialized delay and reverb plugins designed specifically for ambisonic processing. While I eventually install their entire collection, these four core plugins form the essential foundation for any ambisonic workflow I undertake.

2. APL Virtuoso

When working with multi-channel formats that need to be monitored binaurally, APL Virtuoso has become my go-to solution. What distinguishes this renderer is its extraordinary flexibility in handling input formats—it accommodates configurations up to 22.2 Hamasaki layouts, rendering them effectively for headphone monitoring.

The plugin offers several features that make it particularly valuable. First, its native head tracking capability means I can connect a head tracker directly. Second, its standalone mode allows it to function as an external binaural renderer, creating workflow possibilities beyond the DAW environment. Finally, its cross-platform availability means I maintain consistent monitoring capabilities, whether working on Mac or Windows systems.

For immersive audio work that requires extensive binaural monitoring during production, APL Virtuoso offers a level of flexibility and sound quality that has made it essential to my workflow.

3. Fiedler Audio Dolby Atmos Composer

Perhaps the plugin I use most frequently in my immersive audio productions is Fiedler Audio’s Dolby Atmos Composer. I maintain both the free Essentials version and the paid full version on my system specifically for my YouTube channel—it allows me to show features with the free version that viewers can access without purchase. If I weren’t creating educational content, I would simply install the paid version, as it has become central to my Dolby Atmos workflow.

The plugin streamlines many aspects of Atmos production that might otherwise require complex routing and automation strategies. Rather than integrating with the Dolby Atmos Renderer, it provides an alternative workflow for Dolby Atmos creation. One of its strengths is its integration with Fiedler Audio’s Spacelab reverb as well as the Gravitas dynamics plugin, creating a full featured ecosystem for spatial audio processing.

If you’re serious about Dolby Atmos, this plugin is a great investment, providing professional tools with a straightforward learning curve. It has become the cornerstone of my object-based mixing approach.

4. FabFilter Plugin Suite

While not primarily marketed as immersive audio tools, FabFilter’s suite of plugins has become an unexpected yet essential component of my spatial audio workflow. What many producers don’t realize is that these plugins operate as multi-channel processors, making them extraordinarily valuable for immersive production work.

FabFilter’s entire collection functions effectively with multi-channel audio of up to 16 channels. This means that when working with formats like 7.1.4 or 9.1.6, I can apply consistent processing across all channels simultaneously. For instance, when using Pro-Q on a 16-channel track, it operates as a multi-mono plugin affecting all channels individually yet coherently.

This capability extends to the majority of the product line, including the exceptional Pro-R 2 reverb, which functions as a highly capable multi-channel reverb processor. The precision and transparency FabFilter offers make these tools particularly valuable for immersive audio, where maintaining spatial clarity while applying processing is paramount.

For anyone serious about immersive audio production, having the complete FabFilter toolkit essentially provides every general-purpose processing capability needed for up to 16 channels. This eliminates the need for many specialized plugins, streamlining the workflow while maintaining exceptional sound quality across the entire immersive sound field.

5. NovoNotes 3DX

Rounding out my essential immersive toolkit is NovoNotes 3DX, a remarkably versatile panning plugin that offers extraordinary flexibility in translating between different channel configurations. This tool allows me to take content from one format—such as 7.1.6—and adapt it precisely to another format like 5.1.4.

The advanced positioning capabilities extend beyond simple channel remapping, allowing for nuanced scaling, rotation, and positioning of the entire sound field around the listener. This level of control becomes invaluable when adapting content between different immersive formats or when creative repositioning is required.

I typically install both 3DX and the simpler HPL processor, which offers streamlined binaural rendering when the full panning capabilities aren’t required. While not inexpensive, 3DX’s unique capabilities make it irreplaceable for complex immersive audio projects that require sophisticated spatial transformations.

The Essential Five

These five plugins cover the fundamental needs for immersive audio production without redundancy. Each addresses a distinct aspect of spatial audio creation—from ambisonic processing and binaural monitoring to object placement and format conversion—forming a comprehensive toolkit with minimal overlap.

What makes these particular tools stand out is their consistent reliability. In a rapidly developing landscape where new immersive audio tools emerge regularly, these plugins have remained central to my workflow across countless productions. Their proven effectiveness and versatility make them valuable starting points for anyone building their own spatial audio toolkit, regardless of specific production requirements.

Watch the full video walkthrough of my complete plugin setup here:

Subscribe now

The intersection of consumer technology and professional audio tools continues to yield fascinating possibilities for immersive audio production. In recent years, head tracking has emerged as a crucial component for virtualizing immersive music studio spaces, particularly when working with formats like Dolby Atmos. While dedicated tracking solutions exist in the market, I’ve discovered an intriguing workaround that leverages the sophisticated head tracking capabilities of Apple AirPods Pro for use with professional studio headphones.

Subscribe now

The Head Tracking Dilemma

When discussing immersive audio production, the conversation inevitably turns to monitoring solutions. For those working in Dolby Atmos or other spatial audio formats, the ability to track head movement provides a more natural and accurate representation of a virtualized 3D audio environment. This capability allows producers and engineers to experience positional audio cues with greater fidelity, improving mix decisions and spatial awareness.

Apple’s AirPods, particularly the Pro models with the H2 chip, offer remarkably stable and intuitive head tracking. The system works seamlessly with Apple devices and provides excellent tracking accuracy. But, as many audio professionals have noted in response to my earlier videos, AirPods aren’t ideal for serious listening during production. Their frequency response, isolation characteristics, and overall sonic signature simply don’t meet the standards required for professional audio work.

This creates an interesting technical challenge: how can we harness the excellent head tracking capabilities of AirPods while continuing to use our preferred studio headphones for accurate monitoring?

A Simple but Effective Solution

The solution emerged during a conversation with Daniel Rudrich, the developer of Headitude, an application that extracts orientation data from Apple AirPods and converts it into OSC messages for digital audio workstations or the Dolby Atmos renderer. Daniel mentioned that one of his colleagues had 3D printed an attachment for mounting AirPods to studio headphones, using them solely as head tracking devices.

While 3D printing presents an elegant solution, I discovered an even more accessible approach using silicone ear hooks—the same type designed to keep AirPods securely in place during physical activities. It is easy to adapt these inexpensive add-ons into mounts for AirPods on studio headphones.

The implementation is remarkably straightforward:

1. Begin by turning off automatic ear detection in your AirPods settings. This prevents the AirPods from deactivating when they’re not placed in your ears. Navigate to the Bluetooth settings for your AirPods Pro, locate the automatic ear detection option, and toggle it off.

2. The next step is to attach the silicone ear hooks to your studio headphones. The attachment method depends on your specific headphone model and how permanent you want the connection to be. In my case, a simple piece of Velcro provided sufficient stability while allowing for easy removal when not needed.

3. To finish, place the AirPods in the ear hooks, securing them to your studio headphones. This creates a hybrid system where the AirPods provide positional tracking data while your studio headphones deliver high-quality audio.

If you are using Headitude, you must calibrate the setup within Headitude to establish a proper reference point for head position. Once calibrated, the system tracks the orientation of your studio headphones with accuracy sufficient even for professional applications.

Audio Routing Considerations

One critical aspect of this setup involves proper audio routing. Because your computer sees your AirPods as an audio output, make sure that your audio is routed to your interface, not the AirPods. This is configurable either in your system audio settings or in your Digital Audio Workstation.

The process essentially decouples the AirPods’ tracking functionality from their audio reproduction capabilities, allowing each device to focus on what it does best: accurate spatial tracking from the AirPods and high-quality audio reproduction from your studio headphones.

Expanding Possibilities

This solution also works for other devices besides the AirPods Pro. Any Apple earbuds equipped with the H2 chip support this functionality, including the newer AirPods 4 and certain Beats products like the Beats Fit Pro or the Powerbeats Pro 2. This broadens the accessibility of the approach for professionals who might already own compatible devices.

The technique represents an interesting convergence of consumer technology and professional audio requirements. By repurposing devices designed primarily for casual listening into precision tools for immersive audio production, we can create cost-effective solutions that enhance our workflow without sacrificing audio quality.

For a more in-depth look at this technique, check out my accompanying YouTube video; it shows the complete setup and the system in action.

Subscribe now

Note: In an earlier version of this post, the plugin was called DANU. The developer has since renamed the plugin to INU. The text of this post has been changed accordingly.

In the evolving landscape of immersive audio, maintaining the integrity of stereo mixes while creating compelling multichannel content has been a persistent challenge. The introduction of INU (Immersive Nulling Upmixer), the world’s first and currently only nulling upmixer, marks a significant shift in how we approach this challenge.

The concept of nulling in audio production isn’t new, but its application in immersive audio creation through INU offers a novel solution to a common problem. As Sam Hocking, the developer of INU, explains, “The whole idea of INU is to distribute the stereo signal that you’ve already got and try to massage it around the room without unbalancing what the engineer originally intended in the stereo.” This approach ensures that when the immersive mix is folded down to stereo, it perfectly matches the original stereo mix – a process known as nulling.

Subscribe now

Understanding the technical foundation helps appreciate why this matters. Traditional upmixing solutions, such as Penteo and similar tools, often alter the original stereo mix in subtle but meaningful ways. When these mixes are folded back down to stereo, they don’t perfectly match the original. This discrepancy can be problematic when working with carefully crafted stereo mixes that need to maintain their original character while gaining the benefits of spatial distribution.

INU’s Approach to Signal Processing

INU approaches this challenge through a sophisticated signal processing chain that sets it apart from traditional upmixers. The system initially separates the direct and diffuse components of the incoming stereo signal. In this context, the direct signal, similar to but not identical to the mid signal in mid-side processing, represents what’s common between the left and right channels. The diffuse signal conversely, captures the unique aspects of each channel. This separation allows for precise control over how distinct elements of the mix are distributed in three-dimensional space.

The implementation of INU’s signal chain is particularly elegant. As Hocking describes it, imagine two balloons in the center of your listening space: one for the direct signal and one for the diffuse signal. These balloons can be independently “stretched” toward different speakers, allowing for nuanced control over the spatial distribution of your audio. This metaphor helps visualize how INU maintains perfect downmix compatibility while creating engaging immersive experiences.

The Signal Flow and Controls

The signal processing in INU follows a specific order that maximizes control and flexibility. First, the low-frequency content can be selectively routed to the LFE channel, with precise control over the cutoff frequency and Q value. This allows for natural bass management while maintaining the integrity of the full-range stereo signal. Next, the center channel processing includes a sophisticated shaping system that can focus on specific frequency ranges – particularly useful for isolating and controlling vocal content in the center speaker.

After the LFE and center processing, INU provides independent control over how the remaining direct and diffuse signals are distributed throughout the immersive space. The direct signal push determines how much of the mono-compatible content moves into the surrounds and heights, while separate controls for the diffuse signal allow for precise front-back and up-down positioning. This granular control enables the creation of natural-sounding immersive mixes that respect the original stereo production.

Democratizing Immersive Audio Production

What makes INU particularly revolutionary is its development approach. Built using Pure Data through the PlugData platform, INU represents a new model of audio software development – one that prioritizes accessibility and transparency. The plugin’s source code is available to users, encouraging a community-driven approach to feature development and improvement. This open nature, combined with its affordable price point, democratizes access to high-quality immersive audio tools.

The implications for the industry are significant. While traditional upmixing solutions often come with price tags in the hundreds or thousands of dollars, INU offers superior technical capabilities for stereo compatibility at a fraction of the cost. This democratization of immersive audio tools opens new possibilities for independent creators and smaller studios looking to enter the Dolby Atmos space.

Practical Implementation and Future Potential

The integration of INU into the workflow has been meticulously designed. While currently optimized for use with Reaper and the Fiedler Audio Dolby Atmos Composer, work is ongoing to ensure compatibility with other digital audio workstations. This combination of Reaper, INU, and Fiedler Audio Dolby Atmos Composer creates an incredibly cost-effective entry point into professional Dolby Atmos production.

However, it’s crucial to understand the monitoring requirements when working with INU. Because the stereo downmix remains constant regardless of spatial adjustments, proper immersive monitoring becomes essential for making informed decisions about spatial placement. This might mean working in a full Dolby Atmos studio or, at minimum, using head-tracked binaural monitoring to evaluate the three-dimensional image effectively.

INU’s applications extend beyond simple stereo-to-Atmos conversion. As Hocking explains, the plugin was designed with stem processing in mind. When working with separated stems (whether through traditional multitracks or AI-powered source separation), multiple instances of INU can be used to create sophisticated immersive mixes where different elements occupy distinct spaces in the three-dimensional sound field, all while maintaining perfect stereo compatibility.

Final Thoughts

The emergence of INU represents more than just a new tool in the audio engineer’s arsenal – it signals a fundamental shift in how we approach the creation of immersive content. By preserving the integrity of stereo mixes while enabling creative spatial distribution, INU helps bridge the gap between traditional stereo production and the expanding world of immersive audio. Its innovative approach to signal processing, combined with its accessibility and transparent development model, sets a new standard for what we should expect from immersive audio tools.

Subscribe now

The world of immersive audio can seem daunting, especially when it comes to Dolby Atmos music production. Many assume that creating music in Dolby Atmos requires expensive equipment and software. However, there's actually a way to begin experimenting with Dolby Atmos production without spending a dime.

The Essential Tools

The key to this accessible entry point is the Fiedler Audio Dolby Atmos Composer Essential, a free scaled-down version of their professional Dolby Atmos Composer. Combined with Reaper (which offers a generous evaluation period), this creates a viable pathway for anyone interested in exploring immersive audio production.

Understanding the Basics

At its core, Dolby Atmos works with 128 channels divided into two groups. The first 10 channels form the "Dolby Atmos Bed," which serves as an anchor for the production in a 7.1.2 format. The remaining 118 channels are object channels, allowing you to position mono sound sources anywhere in three-dimensional space. Think of these objects as sounds that can float around like bees or flies, creating a truly immersive experience.

The Production Workflow

The workflow is surprisingly straightforward. After installing the Dolby Atmos Composer Essential on your master track, you can use the Dolby Atmos Beam plugin (included with the Composer) on individual tracks to send them either to the bed or as objects in your 3D space. From there, you can adjust parameters like azimuth, elevation, and spread to position your sounds in the three-dimensional field.

A Notable Feature

One particularly neat feature of the Essential version is its ability to play back Dolby Atmos master files. This is significant because these specialized files (which contain 128 channels and complex metadata) typically require specific software to play back. Having this capability built into the free version makes it much easier to check your work and ensure everything translates correctly.

The Bottom Line

While professional Dolby Atmos studios with multiple speakers remain the gold standard for monitoring, the barrier to entry for creating Dolby Atmos content has never been lower. Whether you're a curious bedroom producer or a professional looking to expand into immersive audio, these free tools provide a legitimate way to start experimenting with three-dimensional sound.

Want to learn more about the technical details and see this workflow in action? Check out the full video tutorial below, which dives deeper into the setup process and demonstrates these concepts in practice.

Subscribe now

In the evolving landscape of immersive audio production, managing individual channel behavior across complex speaker arrays remains a persistent challenge. The recent release of Stemcell V2 from The Cargo Cult introduces an innovative solution through its channel-specific spectral ducking for multichannel studio environments. While the developer modestly describes it as "boring, something nobody wants but everybody needs," this characterization understates its transformative potential for immersive mixing workflows.

Understanding Channel-Specific Spectral Ducking

Traditional ducking is a fundamental technique in audio production, commonly used for voice-overs, broadcast mixing, and dialogue clarity. Stemcell V2 elevates this concept by enabling independent ducking behavior across individual channels in an immersive setup. This granular control allows you to configure front channels to respond differently than surrounds or height channels to the same input signal. In film and television mixing, this advancement creates new possibilities for maintaining spatial consistency while ensuring dialogue clarity.

The solution extends beyond basic level control by incorporating frequency-dependent processing customizable to each channel's role in the immersive field. For example, height channels can preserve ambient elements while front channels provide more aggressive ducking for dialogue clarity – all driven by the same sidechain input but with distinct behavioral characteristics.

Implementation Considerations

Implementing this feature effectively requires careful evaluation of your production environment. While the functionality shines in DAWs like Studio One, where channel routing and sidechain implementation are straightforward, some technical hurdles exist. Notably, the plugin currently conflicts with Reaper's sidechaining approach due to differences in channel layout detection – a common challenge for tools transitioning from Pro Tools' structured environment to more flexible DAW architectures. This limitation unfortunately makes the spectral ducking feature unavailable to Reaper users.

For facilities working in immersive formats, Stemcell V2's channel processing approach offers clear advantages, particularly in post-production workflows where precise spatial control is essential. The ability to independently process each channel while maintaining coherent behavior across the immersive field solves a crucial challenge in spatial audio production: adjusting individual elements without compromising the overall spatial image.

However, the substantial investment required means this tool is best suited for environments where its capabilities align with regular workflow needs, rather than as a speculative addition to a plugin collection. Those interested in this plugin should explore alternative solutions from other developers such as Waves and PSP AudioWare.

Subscribe now

The transition to immersive audio production brings new challenges to the studio environment, particularly in monitoring and quality control. Ginger Audio's Ground Control Sphere has emerged as a noteworthy solution for Mac-based studios, and their V2 release introduces several workflow enhancements worth examining.

Smart Interface Management

A standout feature in this update is the software's innovative approach to multi-interface integration. Professional audio interfaces with sufficient output channels for immersive formats often come with hefty price tags, creating a barrier for many studios. Ground Control Sphere V2 elegantly solves this problem by allowing users to combine multiple affordable interfaces into a unified output configuration.

The implementation allows studios to create a functional Atmos monitoring setup using two modest 10-channel interfaces instead of investing in expensive specialized hardware. Through an intuitive interface, users can assign individual channels to specific outputs across different interfaces, while the software handles routing and synchronization behind the scenes. This integration surpasses macOS's built-in aggregate device functionality, offering a more streamlined, production-focused solution that appears as a single interface to your DAW.

Advanced Bass Management and Monitoring Control

The V2 update shines in its sophisticated bass management capabilities, particularly benefiting studios with distributed speaker systems. The software supports up to four subwoofers with individual routing and crossover settings, enabling precise control over LFE distribution. This feature proves invaluable when optimizing low-frequency response across different listening positions in challenging room acoustics.

Beyond bass management, the software excels in signal routing flexibility, allowing users to create custom downmix configurations and monitoring scenarios. Engineers can seamlessly switch between full Atmos monitoring and various consumer playback systems, making quality control more efficient. This versatility ensures content translates effectively across different delivery formats.

Practical Implementation and Workflow Benefits

While the interface aggregation capability offers significant advantages, it requires thoughtful setup and configuration. Users must carefully plan their routing architecture, particularly for complex channel configurations. The software assists with visual feedback and channel status indicators, but initial setup demands attention to detail when working with different channel formats and speaker layouts.

The solution extends beyond basic monitoring tasks, enabling studios to create and store various monitoring scenarios for different production stages. This feature proves particularly valuable in facilities where multiple engineers work on the same project or when projects move between production phases. The ability to store and recall these configurations ensures consistency while streamlining session setup.

For studios transitioning into immersive audio production, Ground Control Sphere V2 represents a practical path forward. It allows facilities to leverage existing hardware while gradually building out their immersive monitoring capabilities. Although currently limited to the Mac ecosystem, the software demonstrates how thoughtful design can address real-world production challenges. As more studios adapt to immersive formats, solutions like this that enable cost-effective, gradual upgrades will play a crucial role in the industry's evolution.

Subscribe now

In the ever-changing landscape of audio production technology, Apple's AirPods Pro 2 have introduced an intriguing capability: FDA-approved hearing aid functionality. While primarily known for their convenience and noise-canceling features, these earbuds might offer audio professionals an unexpected tool for addressing subtle hearing variations that influence their work. This development comes at a time when the audio industry is increasingly recognizing the impact of individual hearing characteristics on production decisions.

Understanding Personal Hearing Profiles

As a technology educator and headphone collector, I've become acutely aware that our hearing characteristics significantly impact how we approach audio work. My own experience with a mild cookie-bite hearing loss in the mid-range illustrates this connection. This type of hearing variation, while not severe enough to affect daily life, influences how I perceive certain headphones - particularly finding bright-sounding models like Beyerdynamics more fatiguing than others might.

The relationship between personal hearing characteristics and monitoring preferences runs deeper than many acknowledge. When headphone reviewers discuss their preferred frequency response curves, they're often unknowingly describing how these curves complement their own hearing profiles. This observation suggests that many of our "objective" preferences in audio equipment might be more closely tied to our individual hearing characteristics than we typically acknowledge.

The AirPods Pro's hearing assistance features address these individual variations through detailed personalization. Using either Apple's built-in hearing test or third-party applications like Mimi, the system creates a profile of your hearing characteristics. This profile then informs real-time adjustments to any audio passing through the AirPods, whether from a digital audio workstation or other sources.

Practical Applications in Audio Production

The implementation of this technology offers some practical advantages for audio work, though within specific constraints. While AirPods Pro won't replace high-end studio monitors or professional headphones for critical mixing and mastering, they provide a useful reference point for understanding how your hearing affects your production decisions.

What makes this particularly relevant is how hearing varies not just between individuals, but also across time and conditions. Even without clinical hearing loss, our hearing sensitivity fluctuates daily and changes gradually with age. The AirPods Pro's ability to compensate for these variations could help maintain consistency in audio work, especially when working across different environments or during long sessions.

Implications for Professional Audio Work

The audio engineering community has historically been reluctant to discuss hearing variations, particularly age-related changes. This reluctance is understandable - who would choose a mastering engineer with known hearing issues? However, this silence might be counterproductive. Every audio professional, regardless of age or experience, has unique hearing characteristics that influence their work. The availability of tools like AirPods Pro's hearing assistance features might help normalize conversations about these variations and their impact on audio production.

The technology's relevance extends beyond those with identifiable hearing loss. Even subtle variations in hearing can affect how we perceive and mix audio, particularly in the critical mid-range frequencies where much of our musical decision-making occurs. By providing a way to compensate for these variations, AirPods Pro can offer an additional tool for maintaining consistency in audio work.

However, it's crucial to understand the technology's limitations. The system requires careful setup through an iPhone, and the correction algorithms only work with Apple devices. The frequency response of the AirPods themselves, while adequate for many purposes, doesn't match the precision of professional studio monitors or high-end headphones. Yet, these constraints don't diminish its potential value as part of a broader toolkit for audio professionals seeking to understand and compensate for their personal hearing characteristics.

Looking ahead, this technology might signal a broader shift in how we approach monitoring and hearing compensation in professional audio. As our understanding of individual hearing variations grows, tools that can adapt to personal hearing characteristics might become increasingly important in maintaining consistent audio production standards across different engineers and environments. While AirPods Pro won't replace traditional studio equipment, their new hearing aid functionality represents an interesting step toward more personalized approaches to audio monitoring and production.

Subscribe now

The pursuit of immersive audio in a portable format has led to numerous innovations over the years, but few have taken as bold an approach as Qudelix with their T71 system. At first glance, it might appear to be just another high-end DAC/IEM combination, but beneath the surface lies a fundamentally different approach to personal audio that challenges our traditional understanding of how IEMs can deliver spatial audio.

A New Direction in Personal Audio

The audio industry has long wrestled with the challenge of delivering convincing surround sound through headphones. Most solutions rely on complex digital signal processing and binaural rendering to create the illusion of space. Qudelix, however, has taken a radically different approach with the T71 system, implementing a physical solution to a traditionally digital problem.

At the heart of this system is the T71 DAC, a compact yet powerful device that distinguishes itself through its ability to process and output true multi-channel audio. Unlike conventional portable DACs that handle stereo signals, the T71 can receive and process up to eight channels of digital audio. This capability is enabled by a sophisticated quad ES9219 Sabre DAC configuration, effectively doubling the processing power found in their popular 5K model.

The real innovation, however, emerges in how this multi-channel processing is utilized. Rather than downmixing these channels into a stereo signal, the T71 DAC maintains discrete channel separation through a specialized USB-C output. This output feeds into the equally innovative T71 IEMs, which feature a unique four-driver setup in each earpiece specifically designed to recreate a 7.1 surround sound environment.

Engineering Marvel with Practical Compromises

The T71 IEMs represent a fascinating exercise in acoustic engineering. Each earpiece contains four precisely positioned drivers that work in concert to create distinct sound sources within the ear canal. This approach bypasses the need for digital spatial processing entirely, instead relying on the physical positioning and sonic characteristics of drivers to create a sense of space.

The implementation, however, comes with some noteworthy compromises. The most significant is the requirement for a proprietary 10-wire USB-C connection between the DAC and IEMs. This means the T71 IEMs are exclusively compatible with their companion DAC – a limitation that might give pause to those accustomed to the flexibility of traditional IEMs. The system also foregoes wireless connectivity entirely, requiring a direct USB connection to the source device.

Beyond Surround Sound: A Tuner's Paradise

While the surround sound capabilities of the T71 system present mixed results in practice, the system reveals its true potential in an unexpected area: unprecedented driver customization. Through a comprehensive web-based interface, users gain access to something previously unheard of in consumer IEMs – the ability to individually tune each driver in the system.

This level of control transforms the T71 from a mere surround sound solution into a sophisticated platform for acoustic experimentation. Users can apply specific equalization settings to each driver, implement various filter types, and even mute individual drivers to understand their contribution to the overall sound signature. This granular control over the acoustic presentation opens up possibilities that were previously available only to IEM manufacturers during the development phase.

The Spatial Audio Experience

In practice, the T71's approach to spatial audio produces interesting, if not entirely convincing, results. The system excels at positioning sounds behind the listener, creating a convincing sense of rear-channel immersion. However, the front soundstage presents a unique challenge – the intimate nature of IEM presentation places the listener seemingly within the center channel, with most of the sound image occurring behind the listening position.

This characteristic creates an unusual spatial perspective that, while distinct from traditional headphone surround sound, may not align with listeners' expectations of spatial audio. It's less like sitting in a theater and more like being on stage with the sound system behind you – an interesting perspective, but perhaps not the intended one.

Conclusion

The Qudelix T71 system represents more than just another entry in the growing field of high-end personal audio devices. It demonstrates a willingness to challenge fundamental assumptions about how we can deliver immersive audio in a portable format. While its implementation of surround sound may not be perfect, the system's driver-level customization capabilities point toward exciting possibilities for the future of personal audio.

For audio enthusiasts interested in exploring the boundaries of what's possible with IEM tuning, the T71 system offers unprecedented control and flexibility. It may not replace your everyday IEMs, but it opens up new avenues for understanding and manipulating multi-driver IEM configurations. In this regard, the T71 system might be better understood not as a final solution for portable surround sound, but as a glimpse into the future of personalized audio experiences.

Subscribe now

In the evolving landscape of immersive audio production, the question of specialized monitoring equipment remains a constant point of discussion. Sony's MDR-MV1 headphones, among other things also marketed for binaural audio monitoring, present an interesting case study in this ongoing debate. While these headphones have generated significant interest in the immersive audio community, the fundamental question remains: do we really need specialized headphones for binaural audio work?

Personal Context

Before getting into the technical analysis, it's worth noting that this assessment comes with its own context. I have a mild cookie bite hearing loss in the midrange, resulting in a naturally V-shaped hearing profile. While this hearing characteristic isn't particularly noticeable in daily life - I hear high and low frequencies perfectly well but experience a slight dip in the mid frequencies - it does influence my monitoring preferences.

This natural predisposition initially made me hesitant about the MDR-MV1s, as their bright frequency response profile typically wouldn't align with my preference for headphones with more pronounced mids. In my experience, overly bright headphones tend to cause me ear fatigue rather quickly.

Technical Analysis

The MDR-MV1 makes its first impression through exceptional physical design choices. Sony has created a remarkably lightweight construction that proves comfortable during extended sessions, while maintaining professional durability standards. The implementation of an industry-standard 3.5mm connector shows practical forethought, making cable replacement both straightforward and cost-effective. This attention to practical usability extends to the sophisticated swivel mechanism, which provides excellent adaptability to different head shapes and sizes.

In terms of sonic characteristics, the frequency response profile reveals some notable traits that shape the MDR-MV1's personality. The headphones exhibit a slightly emphasized high-frequency response around 6.3 kHz, balanced by a mild attenuation in the 4 kHz range. Despite my initial concerns about the bright signature, I found it surprisingly manageable even during extended listening sessions. The low-frequency reproduction maintains composure throughout, and the overall response can easily be adjusted with EQ when needed.

Comparative Analysis

To provide meaningful context, I evaluated the MDR-MV1 against two established competitors in the professional monitoring space which I tend to use quite often. The Ollo Audio S5X, another headphone marketed for binaural optimization, offers similar sonic presentation but falls short in ergonomic adaptability. Its limited adjustability can create fitting issues for users with larger or smaller head sizes, though its overall build quality remains commendable.

The HD490 Pro on the other hand, a widely respected new headphone from Sennheiser, matches the MDR-MV1 in build quality and offers a more neutral frequency response out of the box. However, its reliance on a proprietary mini-XLR cable system introduces potential long-term maintenance considerations that the MDR-MV1 neatly sidesteps with its standard connector choice.

Binaural Performance Assessment

Perhaps the most revealing finding of my analysis challenges common assumptions about specialized binaural monitoring headphones. In direct comparison tests, the differences in binaural reproduction capabilities between these three professional-grade headphones proved remarkably minimal to non-existant. This observation supports a broader conclusion: high-quality headphones with good imaging characteristics generally perform adequately for binaural work, regardless of specific optimization claims.

Conclusion

The Sony MDR-MV1 represents a high-quality monitoring solution that proves its worth through overall performance rather than specialized features. While marketed for binaural applications, its success stems more from fundamental design excellence than from any specialized optimization. This reinforces a crucial principle in audio production: well-designed monitoring solutions often transcend their marketed specializations.

I must admit that I had underestimated the MDR-MV1's capabilities based on their frequency response graphs alone. While they do exhibit a brighter signature, they're nowhere near as fatiguing as some other monitoring headphones I've used, such as certain Beyerdynamic models. The brightness is easily manageable through EQ, and the overall package delivers professional-grade performance that extends well beyond its marketed specialization.

For audio professionals considering these headphones, the decision should primarily rest on their personal monitoring preferences and workflow requirements rather than the specific binaural marketing angle. Even for someone like me who typically gravitates toward a more mid-forward sound signature, the MDR-MV1's combination of comfort, sound quality, and practical design choices makes it a compelling option for any professional audio application, binaural or otherwise.

Subscribe now

In the rapidly evolving landscape of audio production technology, the need for personalized, accurate listening environments has never been more pressing. Sony's 360 Virtual Mixing Environment (360 VME) emerges as a groundbreaking solution, offering an unprecedented level of accuracy in virtual studio reproduction through headphones. Unlike conventional virtual mixing environments, Sony's approach focuses on something unique: personalization based on individual ear and head geometry.

Understanding 360 VME Technology

At its core, Sony's 360 VME operates on a straightforward principle: it measures your unique hearing experience in a professional music studio and recreates that exact experience through headphones. However, the sophistication lies in its execution. The system accounts for multiple variables, particularly focusing on individual head and ear geometry, including the specific shape of ear canals. This attention to personal acoustic characteristics sets it apart from other virtual mixing solutions.

The Measurement Process: Technical Precision in Practice

The measurement process consists of several carefully structured steps:

• Placement of miniature probe microphones in the ears (a notably non-invasive procedure)

• Two-phase measurement sequence:

  • Initial measurements without headphones using white noise bursts and frequency sweeps

  • Secondary measurements with headphones (typically Sony MDR-MV1)

• Head size measurements using the headphone adjustment scale

• Final verification in the actual studio space

What makes this process particularly remarkable is the final verification stage. Users experience a seamless transition between headphone playback and studio monitor playback, creating a powerful reference point for their brain. This moment proves crucial for the system's effectiveness, as it establishes a concrete connection between the virtual and physical listening experiences.

Educational Applications: A Game-Changing Solution

The educational sector emerges as one of the most compelling applications for 360 VME technology. The system addresses a persistent challenge in music production education: providing consistent, high-quality studio access to large numbers of students. The benefits for educational institutions are numerous:

• Efficient Resource Management: Students can complete most of their work using the virtual environment, reserving physical studio time for final refinements

• Consistent Learning Experience: Each student gets access to the same high-quality listening environment

• Scalable Solution: Multiple students can work simultaneously without competing for limited studio space

• Cost-Effective: Reduces the need for multiple physical studio spaces while maintaining professional-grade monitoring capabilities

Current Limitations and Future Potential

While the technology shows immense promise, its current implementation comes with certain constraints. The system requires:

• Measurements to be taken in professional studio spaces

• Use of specific headphone models

• A strong mental connection between the virtual and physical spaces

These limitations primarily stem from the measurement process availability rather than technological constraints. Sony's current focus on educational institutions suggests a strategic rollout approach, though future expansion into other sectors seems likely.

The Future of Virtual Studio Environments

Sony's 360 VME represents a significant leap forward in virtual studio technology. Its ability to create personalized, accurate listening environments opens new possibilities for audio education and remote work. While currently focused on educational applications, the technology's potential extends to shared studio spaces and remote production workflows.

The success of 360 VME in educational settings demonstrates that virtual studio environments can effectively complement, and in some cases replace, traditional physical studios. As the technology continues to evolve and become more accessible, it may fundamentally change how we approach audio production education and professional studio work.

Final Thoughts

Sony's 360 VME technology represents more than just another virtual mixing solution; it's a paradigm shift in how we approach personal monitoring spaces. Its particular strength in educational applications suggests that we're seeing just the beginning of its potential impact on audio production workflows. As the technology matures and becomes more widely available, it could revolutionize how we think about studio spaces and audio production education.

Subscribe now

The landscape of 3D audio panning plugins presents an interesting paradox: while immersive audio continues to grow in importance, the selection of tools for positioning sounds in three-dimensional space remains surprisingly limited. Through extensive testing and professional application, several key solutions have emerged as industry standards, each with distinct strengths and limitations that make them suitable for different workflows.

What Makes a True Immersive Panner?

In the growing field of spatial audio, distinguishing true immersive panners from format-specific tools has become increasingly important. Three essential requirements define a genuine immersive panner:

• The ability to handle various multichannel audio input formats

• True 3D positioning capabilities

• Multichannel output support, preferably on the same track

This classification helps separate dedicated panning solutions from format-specific tools like Dolby Atmos Music Panner or Sony's 360 Reality Audio WalkMix Creator, as well as comprehensive spatial audio production systems like SPAT Revolution. While these alternatives serve valuable purposes in audio production, they fulfill different roles in the immersive audio workflow.

The Current Leaders in Immersive Panning

Sound Particles Space Controller Studio: The Versatile Champion

Sound Particles Space Controller Studio has established itself as a comprehensive solution for complex immersive audio projects. Its implementation particularly shines in game audio and complex multimedia productions where precise positioning across multiple speaker configurations is crucial.

Key strengths include:

• Support for advanced channel configurations (9.1.4, 9.1.6, IMAX, and even NHK's 22.2)

• Individual channel manipulation

• iOS remote control support

• Binaural output capabilities

The limitations become apparent in scenarios requiring complex rotational movement, as the rotation options are restricted to the horizontal plane. The inability to select multiple channels for simultaneous manipulation can also impact workflow efficiency in certain situations. Despite these constraints, its stability and comprehensive feature set make it a reliable choice for professional applications.

Find out more at Sound Particles: https://soundparticles.com/products/spacecontroller

NovoNotes 3DX: The Powerful Alternative

3DX distinguishes itself through superior rotational control, making it particularly valuable for virtual reality and interactive media projects. The plugin's comprehensive movement capabilities open up creative possibilities that other solutions struggle to match.

Notable features include:

• Full 360-degree rotation capabilities (pitch, roll, and yaw)

• Comprehensive scaling options

• Ambisonics support

• Binaural rendering

The 7.1.5 channel count limitation can be restrictive for complex productions, and resource usage needs careful management, particularly in projects with multiple instances. These considerations make it more suitable for medium-scale productions or scenarios where advanced rotation control takes priority over channel count.

Find out more at NovoNotes: https://novo-notes.com/

HAL MoveIt: The Three-in-One Solution

MoveIt takes an integrated approach to immersive audio manipulation, combining panning, mixing, and routing functions in a single interface. This unified workflow proves particularly efficient in documentary and broadcast work, where quick adjustments across multiple parameters are common.

Key advantages include:

• Flexible channel routing capabilities

• Built-in mixing functionality

• Clean, intuitive interface

Recent updates have improved DAW compatibility, though some limitations persist in channel configuration handling and Cubase/Nuendo integration. The lack of ambisonics support may also impact its utility in certain production scenarios.

Find out more at HAL Audio: https://www.hal-audio.com/product/move-it/

Cargo Cult Spanner: The Pro Tools Specialist

Though limited to Pro Tools systems, Spanner offers specialized functionality that makes it particularly valuable in film and video post-production workflows. Its movement options are specifically tailored to common cinematic audio requirements.

Distinguished features include:

• Specialized movement options (flyover, pinch, rotate)

• iOS control capabilities

• Strong integration with film and video workflows

The platform exclusivity naturally limits its adoption, but within Pro Tools environments, its specialized features often justify its consideration.

Find out more at The Cargo Cult: https://www.thecargocult.nz/products/spanner

An Interesting Alternative: Penteo Pro Plus

While not designed primarily as a panner, Penteo Pro Plus merits attention for its extensive format support and unique capabilities when combined with ambisonics rotation tools. Its comprehensive channel configuration options make it valuable for complex format conversion scenarios, though the significant price point ($799 at the date of this writing) positions it firmly in the professional market segment.

Find out more at Perfect Surround: https://www.perfectsurround.com/

Making Your Choice

The selection of an immersive panner should be guided by specific production requirements:

• Sound Particles Space Controller Studio excels in situations requiring extensive channel configuration support and stability

• Novo Notes 3DX is optimal for projects demanding complex rotation and scaling

• Spanner serves Pro Tools-based film workflows effectively

• MoveIt provides an efficient solution when mixing and routing capabilities need to be tightly integrated

The field of immersive audio continues to evolve, and these tools represent the current state of the art. While each has its limitations, they collectively enable the creation of sophisticated immersive audio experiences that meet the demands of modern media production.

Subscribe now