Final Project

Your task

Create a new, finished Ambisonics or Dolby Atmos piece that shows what you can do with sound and space. Choose music, a soundscape, an electroacoustic work, or sound design for picture. Make deliberate choices about what the listener notices, where sounds seem to be, and how the experience develops.

Aim for 3–5 minutes. A shorter complete piece or self-contained film excerpt may be approved in your proposal when its scope offers enough challenge and room for development. Agree on the scope before production. A longer piece is not automatically a stronger project.

The proposal is worth 30 points and the final project 100 points. Everyone works toward the shared quality standards below, with individual creative and learning goals agreed in the proposal. You do not need to learn a new application; developing your listening and mixing decisions in familiar tools can be a substantial challenge.

Proposal: November 23

Bring ideas to the November 18 proposal workshop. We will use November 20 to discuss scope, sources, and practical questions. Submit the following written proposal to D2L by class on November 23, ready to discuss your plan. No prototype or finished audio is required with the proposal.

1. Title and description, 1–2 paragraphs. Name the format, source material, intended duration, and concept. Describe the experience you want the listener to have. Include an influence and explain one specific connection to your work.
2. Three goals and how you will evaluate them. State one artistic goal, one technical skill to develop beyond earlier work, and one listening experiment that will help you make a decision. Describe what you will listen for or show as evidence for each goal.
3. Scope and production plan. Identify what you will compose, record, edit, or mix yourself; the materials you already have; and the work still needed. Plan toward the dates below, including access to the immersive room. Agree with me on your master format and playback setup.
4. Sources and intended sharing. List the creators and sources of supplied music, film, recordings, or samples. Bring the relevant license or permission information so we can check whether the finished work can be shared publicly, privately, or only in class. Choose a source suitable for your portfolio plans.

For a listening experiment, you might compare two treatments of distance in the same passage. Ask a listener which better supports the scene, then use what you hear and their feedback to choose or revise the treatment. A well-reasoned decision to keep the original is valid evidence too.

The proposal earns its 30 points for completing these four elements thoughtfully. It is not graded on having produced audio or a “perfect” idea. We will use feedback to agree on feasible, worthwhile goals.

Start a new project

Create a new piece for this final. Do not revise, extend, or resubmit an earlier course project, including your Atmos mix. Choose a new composition, soundscape, film, or self-contained film excerpt that you have not already used for a graded project. Start a new production session and make the creative and mixing decisions for this piece during the final-project period.

You can apply techniques you have learned and use supplied source material; the final must demonstrate new work. Identify your chosen material in the proposal so we can confirm the scope before you begin.

Possible film sources include Sol Levante and The Lost Piano . Check the available audio, credits, and sharing permissions before committing. Using supplied material is welcome; clearly distinguish your contribution from work by the original creators.

Work, listen, and revise

The November 30 prototype is a rough excerpt of about 30–60 seconds that tests your central spatial idea and routing. It can use temporary sources; it does not need to represent the whole piece. We will use class time to work through problems.

A complete rough mix covers your entire approved duration, including the ending. It can have unfinished balance, transitions, and spatial details; it should let us hear how the whole piece works.

At critique, listeners give one timestamped observation and one actionable suggestion tied to the creator’s question. Record the feedback and make at least one substantive revision after critique. Explain what changed and why. You do not have to follow every suggestion.

These milestones are feedback opportunities, not additional separately scored assignments. Their evidence supports the final assessment of experimentation and revision. Book room access early. Our room uses the verified 7.1 layout and has no discrete height speakers; include headphone checks when evaluating height choices.

Shared quality standards

• Intentional spatial design. Placement, distance, width, movement, and stillness support the musical or narrative focus. Explain specific decisions using spatial perception concepts from the course. More motion or more complicated routing does not automatically improve the piece.
• A coherent, controlled mix. Essential material stays clear. Balance, transitions, perspective, and the ending support the concept. For film, preserve picture sync and intelligible speech where present.
• Listening-led revision. Compare alternatives, seek feedback, and make audible improvements. Check the work in the room and on headphones, identify translation problems, and address them or explain the remaining limits.
• Reliable delivery. Masters and listening copies play correctly, agree with the approved specifications, and include the full ending and tails. Listen through the exported playback files for missing sounds, unexpected silence, distortion, and cut-off endings. Include all media needed to open the session. No separate QC report or meter screenshots are required.

Final submission and portfolio package

Submit one clearly organized folder to D2L by 1:00 PM on December 11. Use filenames that identify you, the piece, and the format.

1. Immersive master and room playback file.
   • Atmos: an ADM BWF master. Use the export instructions in the Atmos delivery lesson . You do not need to submit a loudness measurement log or repeat Project 4’s QC documentation.
   • Ambisonics: submit both an undecoded B-format WAV and a decoded 7.1 playback WAV. Export the B-format master before the speaker or headphone decoder; a decoded listening file does not replace this master. Label its order, channel ordering, and normalization. For the course FOA/ATK workflow, this is four-channel FuMa WXYZ. Use the classroom channel order for the 7.1 file. Follow the ATK setup and export guide .
   • Use 48 kHz / 24-bit WAV for ambisonic and decoded listening exports. Approve alternative ambisonic workflows and their delivery specifications in the proposal. For either route, prepare and test playback in our 7.1 room.
2. A two-channel binaural headphone WAV, labeled as binaural, for someone to audition without immersive equipment. For film, also include a picture-synced video with this listening mix and the necessary credits.
3. The complete DAW session with its media. Collect the audio files into the project folder and identify required software or plug-ins. Keep a copy in storage you can access after graduation.
4. A short portfolio description, about 100–150 words. State the concept, your role, the spatial format, tools, collaborators, and source credits. Identify the intended sharing permissions. Public posting is not required.
5. A self-assessment, about 1–2 pages, with the evidence described below.

Before submitting, listen through your exported playback files and make sure that the complete piece is present and plays as intended. This is a final listening check, not a separate written deliverable.

The aim is a piece someone can experience easily and a master you can return to later. The documentation should explain the work without becoming a second production project.

Self-assessment and evidence

Review your three approved goals: what did you achieve, change, or still need to develop? Include two timestamped decision examples. For each, explain the intended effect, the experiment or feedback, what you changed, and the result. At least one example must show a substantive revision after critique. Provide short before-and-after excerpts or clearly identified saved versions so the difference can be heard. Compare versions made during this new final project, such as the rough mix and the revision after critique.

Finish with what you learned, one next improvement, and the grade you believe the work earns, supported by the criteria below. Your self-assessment informs my judgment; it does not determine the grade by itself.

How the grade is produced

Your approved goals give the project its individual direction. The shared standards make expectations consistent across different formats and concepts. An easy goal alone does not establish excellent work; a thoughtful experiment that partly fails can still demonstrate strong learning and judgment.

Total: ___ / 100

Each category is assessed on the evidence: work that meets the stated expectations earns B-range credit; consistently accomplished, well-supported work earns A-range credit. Partial or inconsistent evidence falls in the C range; substantial gaps fall below that. Scores within each range reflect the extent and quality of the evidence. Ambition alone does not earn extra credit, and an explained change of direction is not automatically a deduction.

Discuss goal changes with me and post the agreed update to D2L through the December 4 critique. Later necessary changes should be discussed promptly and explained in the self-assessment. I assign the final score using these criteria and explain any difference from your proposed grade. If our judgments differ by more than a letter step, we meet before the grade is final.