Netflix rolls out high-quality audio support for 5.1 surround sound and Dolby Atmos

[Shawn Knight]

What just happened? Netflix on Wednesday announced a new feature designed to take sound quality to the next level. The appropriately-named high-quality audio is meant to deliver sound that is closer to what the creators intended. It’s not lossless, but rather, what Netflix describes as perceptually transparent.

Based on internal listening tests, scientific studies and listening results from Dolby, Netflix determined that anything above 640 kbps for 5.1 – a 10:1 compression ratio compared to a 24-bit 5.1 channel studio master – wouldn’t deliver any additional value to the listening experience. For Dolby Atmos, the ceiling has been pushed to 768 kbps.

“That means that while the audio is compressed, it is indistinguishable from the original source.” Meh, I’m not so sure that audiophiles would agree with that statement.

Note that these are the maximum bitrates you can experience. Like its video offering, high-quality audio is adaptive and will vary based on your device and bandwidth capabilities. The range for 5.1 is 192 kbps to 640 kbps and for Dolby Atmos, it is 448 kbps to 768 kbps.

Worth mentioning is the fact that Dolby Atmos streaming is only available to members subscribed to Netflix’s premium plan.

Netflix said it expects the bitrates to evolve over time as their encoding techniques become more efficient.

Lead image courtesy Maxx-Studio via Shutterstock

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/79894-netflix-rolls-out-high-quality-audio-support-51.html

 

[amstech]

"That means that while the audio is compressed, it is indistinguishable from the original source. Meh, I’m not so sure that audiophiles would agree with that statement."

Compressed will never be as good, but streaming audio has improved significantly.
Incoming arguments in 3...2...1.
Ohh amstech its the same bitrate!
Ohh amstech is the same quality!
Ohh amstech its the same digital data!
Ohh amstech its real 5.1 just like your home receiver running an optical cable!

Ohhh brother, lord save me from those who think they understand.

 

[yRaz]

"That means that while the audio is compressed, it is indistinguishable from the original source. Meh, I’m not so sure that audiophiles would agree with that statement."

Compressed will never be as good, but streaming audio has improved significantly.
Incoming arguments in 3...2...1.
Ohh amstech its the same bitrate!
Ohh amstech is the same quality!
Ohh amstech its the same digital data!
Ohh amstech its real 5.1 just like your home receiver running an optical cable!

Ohhh brother, lord save me from those who think they understand.

I mean there are serious diminishing returns and there is also a lot of science to back up that audiophiles are full of sh*t. As someone who owns some of the best speakers ever made(JBL4311's), there really isn't a different between my $1000 pair of speakers paired with a marantz preamp and mono blocks of the time comepared to these $20-30,000 listening rooms. And there is always the klipshe reference series, which I have been a fan of for many years. God forbid anything ever happens to my JBLs I'm definitely jumping on a klipshe system.

Why does it sound better? Because you spent a stupid amount of money on it and you need to justify the cost.

I'm not saying go out and buy cheap speakers, but these people paying $500+ for a pair of ear buds are out of their minds.

I forget why I wanted to say any of this but I typed it all out so now I feel obligated to post it ...

 

[amstech]

I forget why I wanted to say any of this but I typed it all out so now I feel obligated to post it ...

Let it all out @yRaz , don't hold back!

 

[wiyosaya]

I mean there are serious diminishing returns and there is also a lot of science to back up that audiophiles are full of sh*t. As someone who owns some of the best speakers ever made(JBL4311's), there really isn't a different between my $1000 pair of speakers paired with a marantz preamp and mono blocks of the time comepared to these $20-30,000 listening rooms. And there is always the klipshe reference series, which I have been a fan of for many years. God forbid anything ever happens to my JBLs I'm definitely jumping on a klipshe system.

Why does it sound better? Because you spent a stupid amount of money on it and you need to justify the cost.

I'm not saying go out and buy cheap speakers, but these people paying $500+ for a pair of ear buds are out of their minds.

I forget why I wanted to say any of this but I typed it all out so now I feel obligated to post it ...

If you go into an audio/video store and listen to speakers, they do sound different between different brands. Speakers, IMO, are one of those key components that make a difference.

About three years ago, I auditioned replacements for speakers that I had for something like 20-years. Actually listening to the speakers I was considering did make a difference in my purchasing decision.

In the 20-years that I had my old speakers, technology has changed significantly. My old speakers had polypropylene cones - the new ones aluminum. The old speakers, with some material, sound like mush compared to the new.

However, my audition of the speakers was done with the same setup in store. To a certain extent, I agree it does not necessarily make a difference what the amp is unless it is crap, of course.

 

[ShagnWagn]

I tried nutflick's trial. I was blown away that just last year they were STILL using 2-channel audio for everything. I searched for a few hours to find a surround sound setting. LOL, well needless to say it was cancelled. Surround sound finally? Welcome to the 1970's, nutflicks. haha!

"high-quality" to whose definition?That is entirely subjective. An 80 yr old deaf grandpa? I would like to be surprised. Beings I already used my free trial, I guess I may never know.

 

[amghwk]

I tried nutflick's trial. I was blown away that just last year they were STILL using 2-channel audio for everything. I searched for a few hours to find a surround sound setting. LOL, well needless to say it was cancelled. Surround sound finally? Welcome to the 1970's, nutflicks. haha!

"high-quality" to whose definition?That is entirely subjective. An 80 yr old deaf grandpa? I would like to be surprised. Beings I already used my free trial, I guess I may never know.

Netflix has digital Dolby sounds encoded and if you have a decoder you can get them. But it is not supported by using a web browser. You need to use Windows Store and download Netflix app.

 

[Evernessince]

"That means that while the audio is compressed, it is indistinguishable from the original source. Meh, I’m not so sure that audiophiles would agree with that statement."

Compressed will never be as good, but streaming audio has improved significantly.
Incoming arguments in 3...2...1.
Ohh amstech its the same bitrate!
Ohh amstech is the same quality!
Ohh amstech its the same digital data!
Ohh amstech its real 5.1 just like your home receiver running an optical cable!

Ohhh brother, lord save me from those who think they understand.

I mean there are serious diminishing returns and there is also a lot of science to back up that audiophiles are full of sh*t. As someone who owns some of the best speakers ever made(JBL4311's), there really isn't a different between my $1000 pair of speakers paired with a marantz preamp and mono blocks of the time comepared to these $20-30,000 listening rooms. And there is always the klipshe reference series, which I have been a fan of for many years. God forbid anything ever happens to my JBLs I'm definitely jumping on a klipshe system.

Why does it sound better? Because you spent a stupid amount of money on it and you need to justify the cost.

I'm not saying go out and buy cheap speakers, but these people paying $500+ for a pair of ear buds are out of their minds.

I forget why I wanted to say any of this but I typed it all out so now I feel obligated to post it ...

Not a lot has changed in the speaker space over the years. A lot more going on recently in Headphone and earbud audio lately.

 

[yRaz]

If you go into an audio/video store and listen to speakers, they do sound different between different brands. Speakers, IMO, are one of those key components that make a difference.

About three years ago, I auditioned replacements for speakers that I had for something like 20-years. Actually listening to the speakers I was considering did make a difference in my purchasing decision.

In the 20-years that I had my old speakers, technology has changed significantly. My old speakers had polypropylene cones - the new ones aluminum. The old speakers, with some material, sound like mush compared to the new.

However, my audition of the speakers was done with the same setup in store. To a certain extent, I agree it does not necessarily make a difference what the amp is unless it is crap, of course.

I've had to have my 4311's reconed and the coils rebuilt. I'm I'm considerong sending them back to JBL to have the magnetics reenergized or whatever they do. I'm a really big fan of klipsche right now. Their reference speakers remind me of the way Advent loud speakers sounded with Titanium tweeters.

I 100% agree about some brands having their own sound. I like MY JBLS because they are true studio monitors, no brand tuning to interfere with the sound. However, I really love the Klipsch brand sound. The horn tweeters seem to bring out sounds I can't otherwise hear as I have 50% hearing loss in both ears. You could call it.... Earitating....

I think the copper colored cones are a bit showy, though. I'd either have to design my home theater around them or find a way to hide them. Pictures done do the speaker covers justice, the copper cones show threw light crazy

 

[psycros]

I prefer Pioneer so even Beethoven sounds like Motely Crue.

 

[yRaz]

I prefer Pioneer so even Beethoven sounds like Motely Crue.

Pioneer doesn't get enough credit, they make great products for a reasonable price and even have some VERY reasonably priced midranged-highend hardware. I'm mostly familer with them for their amps but I've never been disappointed by their speakers

 

[Chesterfried]

I tried nutflick's trial. I was blown away that just last year they were STILL using 2-channel audio for everything. I searched for a few hours to find a surround sound setting. LOL, well needless to say it was cancelled. Surround sound finally? Welcome to the 1970's, nutflicks. haha!

"high-quality" to whose definition?That is entirely subjective. An 80 yr old deaf grandpa? I would like to be surprised. Beings I already used my free trial, I guess I may never know.

I've been getting Dolby 5.1 since it was added to the PS3 app back in 2010.

 

[Peter A Minter]

So is this new "high quality audio" available to regular subscribers or must one be a premium subscriber as with dolby atmos sound quality?

 

[captaincranky]

...[ ]....I mean there are serious diminishing returns and there is also a lot of science to back up that audiophiles are full of sh*t. As someone who owns some of the best speakers ever made(JBL4311's),...[ ]....

I mean no disrespect my prince, but those 4311s, (which were the studio versions of the "Century L100". You know, the guys with the block foam grilles

Somewhat notorious for a, "nasty peak in the bass", likely due to their too large woofers in too small a cabinets.

I will grant you that they will run circles around the 5" studio monitors being passed off on the inbred of today

I had a pair of D-130s with 075 ring radiators in 5 CF cabinets which were truly astonishing. Trouble was with a 105 Db efficiency @ 1 meter, you really couldn't play hard rock without the room muddying up the sound. They were more designed for theater or open air PA work. But for something like Joan Baez or more open country music, they gave you the vocal perspective of being inside the singer's mouth.

I bought a pair of JBL "Stadium" 2 x 8"" towers, and for all the world, I though they should have put the JBL logos on those turds in Chinese characters.The choice of driver location, crossover points, and probably crossover phasing, was atrocious.

So I do have a pair of 2 x 8" Klipsch "Icon" towers in place of them, not the best but they're quite a bit better than the JBLs.
They don't really make 15" cast basket woofers / full range drivers, with 10 pound alnico magnets, and 4" edge wound voice coils on them anymore, at least none so as most would be able to afford.

 

[kira setsu]

Hasnt this been available for awhile?

I know since I started watching netflix that pretty much everything shows up as "dolby d+" on my 10yr old onkyo,

 

[Stingy McDuck]

Netflix has had surround sound for a while. I think the big news here are that they using another compression scheme.

 

[captaincranky]

Pioneer doesn't get enough credit, they make great products for a reasonable price and even have some VERY reasonably priced mid-ranged / high-end hardware. I'm mostly familiar with them for their amps but I've never been disappointed by their speakers (*)

Qoing back 40 years, I used to sell hi-fi gear. At the time, the easiest speaker on the line to get out the door, were the Pioneer HPM-40s, It was a very pleasant sounding 10' 3 way ported system.

Anecdotally, men and women have much different hearing curve. his high end rolls off way before hers, which sometimes made it difficult to sell couples on the same pair of speakers.

So, when a pair of speakers was "spitting razor blades" in the high end, the dude was thrilled, an she was cringing on the verge of pain.

Men have better eyesight in general, while women's hearing goes much higher in terms of frequency.

At the time, I formulated the hypothesis that the reason for the differences was, "so that he could see game at greater distances, and she could better hear babies crying"

While that sounds horrifically sexist, we are after all, still basically the most advanced of the great apes, and biology can't be trumped, (pun intended, I think), by the endless rationalizations and political correctness our higher brain functions bring to bear on those assessments.

In any event, decades later I read a study on the subject of sensory differences in the human male & female. The researchers reached the same conclusion as I did, and those paid douches came to the same conclusions I did, for free. (And it took a whole team of them, which furthered my annoyance). Sometimes I think I'm under appreciated, but then don't we all?

Back to Pioneer's AV receiver product, I had good success with the two I've had over the past. Imagine my horror, when I found my latest purchase didn't have a magnetic phono input! I had to buy a phono preamp to get my 40 year old Technics turntable to make noise After all vinyl was all bur dead a few short years ago, before the hipster movement was duped by it's alleged "superiority to digital" (Ah, the wonders of marketing on the plastic human brain).

(*) My prince, I proofread and corrected a coupe of small things about the post I"m quoting, I hope these small changes meet with your approval.

 

[yRaz]

Qoing back 40 years, I used to sell hi-fi gear. At the time, the easiest speaker on the line to get out the door, were the Pioneer HPM-40s, It was a very pleasant sounding 10' 3 way ported system.

Anecdotally, men and women have much different hearing curve. his high end rolls off way before hers, which sometimes made it difficult to sell couples on the same pair of speakers.

So, when a pair of speakers was "spitting razor blades" in the high end, the dude was thrilled, an she was cringing on the verge of pain.

Men have better eyesight in general, while women's hearing goes much higher in terms of frequency.

At the time, I formulated the hypothesis that the reason for the differences was, "so that he could see game at greater distances, and she could better hear babies crying"

While that sounds horrifically sexist, we are after all, still basically the most advanced of the great apes, and biology can't be trumped, (pun intended, I think), by the endless rationalizations and political correctness our higher brain functions bring to bear on those assessments.

In any event, decades later I read a study on the subject of sensory differences in the human male & female. The researchers reached the same conclusion as I did, and those paid douches came to the same conclusions I did, for free. (And it took a whole team of them, which furthered my annoyance). Sometimes I think I'm under appreciated, but then don't we all?

Back to Pioneer's AV receiver product, I had good success with the two I've had over the past. Imagine my horror, when I found my latest purchase didn't have a magnetic phono input! I had to buy a phono preamp to get my 40 year old Technics turntable to make noise After all vinyl was all bur dead a few short years ago, before the hipster movement was duped by it's alleged "superiority to digital" (Ah, the wonders of marketing on the plastic human brain).

(*) My prince, I proofread and corrected a coupe of small things about the post I"m quoting, I hope these small changes meet with your approval.

Ahh, such a wonderful survant you are, what would I do without you? You may use my goat brothel anytime you desire. Now, if you could just give me your banking info so I can, uhh, set up direct deposit for you that would be great.

 

[toooooot]

"That means that while the audio is compressed, it is indistinguishable from the original source. Meh, I’m not so sure that audiophiles would agree with that statement."

Compressed will never be as good, but streaming audio has improved significantly.
Incoming arguments in 3...2...1.
Ohh amstech its the same bitrate!
Ohh amstech is the same quality!
Ohh amstech its the same digital data!
Ohh amstech its real 5.1 just like your home receiver running an optical cable!

Ohhh brother, lord save me from those who think they understand.

I mean there are serious diminishing returns and there is also a lot of science to back up that audiophiles are full of sh*t. As someone who owns some of the best speakers ever made(JBL4311's), there really isn't a different between my $1000 pair of speakers paired with a marantz preamp and mono blocks of the time comepared to these $20-30,000 listening rooms. And there is always the klipshe reference series, which I have been a fan of for many years. God forbid anything ever happens to my JBLs I'm definitely jumping on a klipshe system.

Why does it sound better? Because you spent a stupid amount of money on it and you need to justify the cost.

I'm not saying go out and buy cheap speakers, but these people paying $500+ for a pair of ear buds are out of their minds.

I forget why I wanted to say any of this but I typed it all out so now I feel obligated to post it ...

I don't consider myself an audiophile, but I listened to Bowers&Wilkins and Monitor Audio along 10 other brands and I just love how first 2 sound. Coincidentally, those 2 also cost a lot. So there is that. I love Klipsch for the clarity of sound which is very good for some types of music. I don't like watching movies with those because I prefer more balances and warm sound for movies.
There are some cheap speakers that can sound almost as well as expensive ones, but thats not true for all of them. There is also size. You will never be able to take a 2 inch speaker driver and make it produce the sound 8 inch driver can do.

 

[captaincranky]

Ahh, such a wonderful survant you are, what would I do without you? You may use my goat brothel anytime you desire. Now, if you could just give me your banking info so I can, uhh, set up direct deposit for you that would be great.

My fondest hope is that one day you will find me worthy of you hippo bordello. I am working toward being able to satisfy the BBBWs who I find constantly lumbering around my hovel. And well, "practice makes perfect". (Or at least so they say )..

I have been diligently laboring toward that end, by buying every male enhancement supplement I can find on the internet. But alas, I still have my shortcomings.

But sadly, in my overzealous quest for "Excalibur", I have had my identity stolen a total of 69 times. I fear I would be doing both of us a great disservice by granting you access to my banking account.

May all of your robocalls find willing recipients, and you be blessed in Allah's name, shalom..

 

[sasat]

Let's do the math: 640 kbps for 6 channels == 106kbps per channel. I think 106 kbps can be distinguished from 192 kbps even by a dog.

 

[grvalderrama]

Let's do the math: 640 kbps for 6 channels == 106kbps per channel. I think 106 kbps can be distinguished from 192 kbps even by a dog.

To be fair, I believe a dog could distinguish 320 kbps from 321 kbps.
By the way, netflix does not have 6 channels audio. 5.1 which it isn't 6 channels, they're just 5. The av receiver delivers the lowest frequencies to the subwoofer to play. Those frequencies are usually the same audio track as the front speakers, then the crossover filters the frequencies that can't reproduce, the lowests (normally 150 hz and below) are played by the subwoofer, low and mid are played by the woofer and the highest played by the twitter.-

 

[nismo91]

My pioneer receiver stopped working when I upgraded to 4k display. it was a 2011 unit so it doesn't support 4K yet. annoyingly it immediately stopped working (hdmi ports) altogether. so not wanting to suffer with using optical for 5.1 (384kbps for 6 channel with dolby digital live) I decided to get an entry yamaha receiver.

immediately I could tell there is some improvement, especially on the rear channels. mind you I do not use any EQ or sound enhancements. a week after that my pioneer seems to starts working again, damnit but I'm not returning this yamaha.

bottom line is, if I can tell same audio file with different amp, rest assured I can tell a 128kbps mp3 from a 320kbps one. so I'm gonna call their bullshit:

Netflix determined that anything above 640 kbps for 5.1 – a 10:1 compression ratio compared to a 24-bit 5.1 channel studio master – wouldn’t deliver any additional value to the listening experience.

 

[OptimumSlinky]

HiFi, like many things, has diminishing returns. There's absolutely a necessary minimum or floor of quality, and most streaming and compressed audio doesn't meet this or does so barely. That said, once you spend a certain amount, it becomes rather meaningless to spend more because the improvement in audio quality is so razor thin that only a truly manic audiophile would notice day in and day out.

I have some old Polk RTi-10s (I think?) that I've had for a decade paired with a new Yamaha Aventage receiver 'cause my Yamaha receiver from 1999 finally died. The pair was about $1,000 new when I got them, and while they're noticeably better than a sound bar, would there really be a large enough improvement in audio to justify the cost of upgrading to something snazzier like Martin-Logans? Especially when most of my audio is either gaming, Netflix, or lossless music files?

I'm going to go ahead and say probably not, thus my humble Polks live on.

 

[amoeba00]

Does anyone know if this will also apply to regular Roku devices (not their TVs) or the nVidia Shield that currently only support 5.1 (no matter which Netflix plan you have)?