Samsung and Google take on Dolby Atmos with a new royalty-free audio format

[zohaibahd]

Forward-looking: Samsung and Google have teamed up to challenge one of the biggest names in immersive audio – Dolby. The two companies have announced Eclipsa Audio, a new open-source spatial audio format designed to bring 3D sound to YouTube and Samsung's latest TVs and soundbars later this year.

For years, Dolby Atmos has been the dominant force in 3D audio, known for its immersive surround sound that makes it feel as though sounds are coming from all around you. It's become a household name, with nearly every major TV manufacturer today paying the "Dolby tax" to license Atmos for their premium sets and speaker systems.

However, Samsung and Google are looking to disrupt the status quo with Eclipsa Audio, a royalty-free alternative. Samsung claims that Eclipsa Audio functions similarly to Atmos by adjusting audio data – such as location, intensity, and spatial reflections – to create 3D sound. The key difference is that it's an open standard, meaning hardware makers won't have to pay licensing fees.

In addition, the two companies are establishing a certification program with the Telecommunications Technology Association to ensure consistent quality across devices using the technology.

Samsung and Google first teased their spatial audio collaboration in 2023 under the name Immersive Audio Model and Formats (IAMF). At the time, Samsung described the initiative as aiming to provide "a complete open-source framework for 3D audio, from creation to delivery and playback."

So why are the two companies putting in all this effort? For Samsung, the primary motivation likely revolves around avoiding licensing costs. With TV profit margins tighter than ever, cutting expenses wherever possible is crucial. Google's motivations are less clear, but it seems the company wants to give YouTube creators a platform to experiment with immersive 3D audio experiences.

"We believe that Eclipsa Audio has the potential to change the way we experience sound," said Jim Bankoski, VP of Engineering at Google Chrome. "We are excited to see how the creator community uses it to create new and innovative audio experiences."

The big question, of course, is whether Samsung and Google's new venture can truly rival Dolby's well-established technology. Dolby has had years to refine Atmos, which has become the industry standard recognized by casual viewers.

Whatever the outcome, we'll get our first real glimpse of how Eclipsa stacks up at CES 2025 next week, where Samsung is expected to provide live demonstrations.

Permalink to story:

Samsung and Google take on Dolby Atmos with a new royalty-free audio format

 

[user478318]

Don't have the audio hardware to test atmos, but dolby vision has sucked badly for me, and I always turn if off. Also any kind of 3D-audio is not good for listening to music. It should be turned off for music, and turned on for games and movies.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Maybe 1% of people who have Atmos (or any other high-end audio) could differentiate it from “regular” audio…

I’m sure Google and Samsung know this and figure that as long as their version is close, plenty of people would drop Dolby (and the expense) from their hardware.

I don’t really care - provided a tv/receiver/etc actually gets cheaper if it doesn’t have Dolby - but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that.

 

[kiwigraeme]

Lots of products don't even play opus natively.
Can't see people with $2000 receivers racing out to get this.
Maybe find for soundbar surround systems , samsung will put out.
No one trusts Google to really care long enough

Doesn't pass the disruptive tech test or even close

 

[toooooot]

Dolby Atmos is affordable.

One catch is that when a 500 dollar TV boasts Dolby Atmos built in, it will be processed through 30 dollar built in speakers... I think that does not require explanation.

In summary, you need a device that has a chip that can process Atmos content, and a decent set of speakers or soundbar.
Even if you do not use surround sound, sound quality is amazing. I use a receiver with now very old Monitor Audio speakers, and the sound is better than from anything else.
Of course, the better gear you have, the better sound you can get, but it is not expensive.
As I said above, you could install surround speakers for complete experience, but there are benefits even without those.

 

[dangh]

Would be great to have a more modern, open standard to listen to 3d sounds. Dolby is just not flexible enough and any proprietary widely used solutions are too limiting, e.g. hdmi ...

 

[RudyBob]

Only if you are sitting 1/64 of an inch to the left can your hear the difference. Even with headphones.

 

[TooQik]

The real cost of any 3D audio configuration is in the amplifiers and speakers required to playback the sounds effectively, so while the manufacturers might save some money on licensing costs, the end user will still need to pay if they want a fully immersive setup.

What will most likely happen is manufacturers will simply include any new 3D decoders/renderers in new AVR models along side Dolby Atmos.

 

[Antias]

As a noob... (genuine question...)
Does this mean I'll have to re-do my PLEX Library (2400+ movies, 14000+ TV Episodes) with another audio format to use the new surround standard? Will it be smart enough to "upscale" Stereo audio from my older stuff to virtual surround? (obviously by re-do I mean only those movies etc that have surround already encoded

(Note: I'm often surprised at how effective Windows Sonic is at creating "virtual" surround-scapes... While often dissapointed with Windows itself (LOL), the Sonic feature actually seems to do a reasonably decent job. PS. so does the built in surround virtualiser in Media Player Classic Black Edition, my go-to media player... the soundscape created is often very realistic in older stereo stuff I wouldnt expect it to be able to handle, but sadly-understandably is terrible with older mono stuff like The Satanic Rites of Dracula 1973 with Christopher Lee & Peter Cushing)

I suppose it always boils down to the decoders ability to decode the "available" data, whether hardware or software decoding...

 

[d0x360]

Don't have the audio hardware to test atmos, but dolby vision has sucked badly for me, and I always turn if off. Also any kind of 3D-audio is not good for listening to music. It should be turned off for music, and turned on for games and movies.

If the songs are mixed in 5.1+ then music sounds amazing on Atmos.. assuming you aren't faking channels..

I've been a user of surround sound since I snagged a Sony 5.1 kit with my first credit card 8000 years ago.. I upgraded to 7.1 then Atmos (11.2.1 atm), I also have spent way too much on headphones chasing spatial goodness never to find anything that can touch even 3 decade old Xbox disc Halo CE for positional audio.

Having the channels (even cheap crap ones) actually there instead of trying to bounce channels or use (admittedly clever) trickery.. it's a massive night and day difference that is beyond immediately obvious.

I can't express my love of surround enough.. it improves everything (except music unless you zone it) I probably would have quit gaming on the 360 if headphones were my only option because it's just that good.

 

[darkzelda]

I've been able to enjoy lossless Dolby True HD with Atmos in my surround system and it's amazing, I couldn't comeback to just regular audio for watching movies.

 

[kira setsu]

Dolby has nothing to worry about, in 6 months we'll read another article about google killing this idea.

what they always do.

 

[Dreadpirateflaps]

Don't have the audio hardware to test atmos, but dolby vision has sucked badly for me, and I always turn if off. Also any kind of 3D-audio is not good for listening to music. It should be turned off for music, and turned on for games and movies.

Vision looks markedly better than standard HDR, I genuinely don't see how people can't like it. It's objectively better.

 

[user478318]

Vision looks markedly better than standard HDR, I genuinely don't see how people can't like it. It's objectively better.

No, standard HDR looks somewhat authentic for me, while Dolby Vision gives me a super warm yellowish image. I have tried it out on PG32UCDM monitor, and LG C9 & LG C3 TV's all of which I own, and results are awful!

 

[mbrowne5061]

No, standard HDR looks somewhat authentic for me, while Dolby Vision gives me a super warm yellowish image. I have tried it out on PG32UCDM monitor, and LG C9 & LG C3 TV's all of which I own, and results are awful!

If you're playing through something like Plex/Jellyfin/whatever, Triple check that you aren't actually transcoding. I had the same issue in some scenes in Dune 2, until I finally got it to direct play across the board (including subtitles)

 

[Tran Bronstein]

My single biggest gripe with YouTube is its inability to support surround sound formats of any kind. My understanding was this had more to do with browsers themselves than actually YouTube. The ability to create a codec that would actually work with YouTube would be a game changer and an absolute must for me. Though I won't much appreciate having to buy a new AVR and/or TV just to use it.