Re: [music-dsp] Binaural broadcasts | Lithuania
Thanks. What you are doing looks very interesting. For the 3D sound part, you might want to take a look at what is happening in Greece at www.cloud.aria3d.com That will give you the front 180 degrees in horizontal plane, but with just two more speakers you can have the full circle. In general, it is now quite easy to have a full circle of sound in the horizontal plane with just four speakers and 4.0 media but only for small groups not theaters. Ralph Glasgal From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Jurgis Jarašius Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 7:30 AM To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu Subject: [music-dsp] Binaural broadcasts | Lithuania Dear all, Lithuanian Academy of Music and Theatre, Music Innovation Studies Centre already for the second time presents binaural broadcasts of contemporary music concerts from ambisonic (23.2 loudspeakers) sphere. Were kindly invite you to join in and discover merits of this spatial sound format. This year we are also using 360° (virtual reality) video possibilities, which would add to the immersion of virtual listeners of the concert. In 4 broadcasts we will listen to the compositions of two famous Lithuanian composers - Juste Janulyte and Mindaugas Urbaitis. All broadcast times and links are available at tv.lmta.lt <http://tv.lmta.lt/> . Time of broadcasts: 2016-11-08, 18.00 CET JANULYTE 2016-11-09, 18.00 CET JANULYTE 2016-11-17, 18.00 CET URBAITIS 2016-11-18, 18.00 CET URBAITIS With this email we intend to reach research and artistic centers, companies dealing with audiovisual technologies, and other entities working in similar spheres. We hope this information is relevant for you. We are experimenting with spatial sound broadcasts hoping to contribute towards discovering the best ways to deal with arts and technology in similar situations through internet. We kindly ask you to join into broadcast and/or inform interested colleagues at your institution. We are very much interested in any feedback provided by email: m...@lmta.lt. Thank you very much in advance for your kind attention! Sincerely, LMTA MiSC ___ dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list music-dsp@music.columbia.edu https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] Music applications/DSP online masters
You might take a look at www.ambiophonics.org which discusses a whole bunch of DSP applications for both recording and reproduction. If you look at the NYU thesis and the related AES paper you will see ideas for more MS thesis ideas. One possibility is to codify Envelophonics and prove why it works. Ralph Glasgal From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Liam Sargent Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2016 6:11 PM To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu Subject: [music-dsp] Music applications/DSP online masters Hello all, Been subscribed to this list for a while and have found the conversation fascinating. I recently graduated with a B.S. in Computer Science and have a strong interest in continuing my education in DSP programming for audio applications. I have recently started a full time job in the SF Bay Area as a software engineer - will likely have to complete course material online. Wondering anyone on this list has recommendations for a solid online M.S. program focused on audio signal processing/music applications, or just resources for continuing my learning in general. Liam ___ dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list music-dsp@music.columbia.edu https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Ross, There is an .amh file that allows you to do what you want rather easily. Go to ambiophonics.org/PCMac.html and scroll down, way down, to see the contraptions used and how to set their controls to get what you want. The key element is your ping pong gizmo. Basically you feed in say a left only signal and you get out a left and right signal pair that when played through two speakers in front separated by 60 degrees, or hopefully less, will produce an image at the far side well beyond the speakers. If it comes out too far to the side then feed the same signal attenuated by say 8 dB to the right input and see if this produces the angle you want and so on. If you want motion you can get if smoothly from far left to far right just by using an input balance control after your soundinput contraption. It does work more reliably if you can move the monitors closer together, but you don't seem to want the absolute ultimate in this sort of thing. This method of pan potting is recursive and so does not have the side effects of a onetime polarity reversal. Remember that in some of the methods proposed so far in this thread, the out of polarity signal is loud enough to reach the wrong ear with little attenuation and this dilutes the wide image effect and makes it unstable. You may remember when Robin Miller contacted you about doing this years ago. Ambisonics was mentioned in an earlier post. Ambiophonics has nothing to do with Ambisonics (or Wavefield Synthesis) except that they are both what I term loudspeaker binaural paradigms. Ambiophonics has the advantage over these others in that it only requires two speakers for a full width front stage and can play any 2.0 data file including the existing library of LPs and CDs. 4 speakers gets you a full circle of direct sound. You should all hear Avatar this way. Ralph Glasgal -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
There is no valid psychoacoustic method to accomplish this and so there can be no valid pan laws to accomplish this. The stereo illusion is like an optical illusion and is quite restricted. The only reason that one can on rare occasions here something beyond the angle of the speakers (in the 60 degree arrangement) is because some crosstalk is inadvertently cancelled or at higher frequencies you tickle the pinna just right. That pinna thing is the reverse polarity combing cancellation pattern that mimics a direction finding pattern for an instant or two. Many of these reverse polarity wide image flukes are fleeting and of course will vary from individual to individual and are also room and speaker dependant. I would say this is a dead end idea. While applying crosstalk cancellation formulas to the pair to be panned can do the job, XTC equations such as RACE work better with speakers closer together. However, you can get a reasonable result even if the speakers are at 60 degrees. At least it will be better than just sending an out of polarity signal to the other speaker. The RACE equations are at www.ambiophonics.org and there are free VST plugins if you want to try it. What this amounts to is making a pre crosstalk cancelled 2.0 recording for some sound sources mixed with other sources that remain in ordinary stereo. That is a mixture of 2 ray and 4 ray pan potted pairs. Interesting. Ralph Glasgal -Original Message- From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Ross Bencina Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:21 AM To: A discussion list for music-related DSP Subject: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law? Hi Everyone, Does anyone know if there's a standard way to calculate pan laws for stereo-wide panning ? By stereo-wide I mean panning something beyond the speakers by using 180-degree shifted signal in the opposite speaker. For example, for beyond hard left you would output full gain signal to the left speaker, and some inverted phase signal to the right speaker. I know this is a somewhat dubious method but I'm wondering if there are known pan laws that handle this case. Thank you, Ross. -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Ambiophonics (actually Panambiophonics) requires four speakers to reproduce a full 360 degrees of direct sound localization in the horizontal plane. It deliberately does not employ HRTFs. The basic program is RACE which stands for Recursive Ambiophonic Crosstalk Elimination. It is a shame that it is not a contraption within AudioMulch which would make it so easy to use in a 4.0 (DTS, etc.) surround application instead of having to use VST plugins in DAWs or Transcoders working under Java. The four speakers needed are quite easy to place. Just two in front spaced about 20 degrees (either side of a TV screen) and two behind the same and two independent copies of RACE running. You never need a front center speaker or a rear center either. (RACE is in the public domain.) For the record, Ambisonics and Wavefield Synthesis are the other Loudspeaker Binaural technologies that are HRTF free, but only Ambiophonics (including the Princeton version) is compatible with all existing 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, etc. media and formats. Ralph Glasgal www.ambiophonics.org -Original Message- From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Dobson Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 9:03 AM To: A discussion list for music-related DSP Subject: Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law? Otherwise, you are looking at hrtf plus crosstalk cancellation (some techniques such as ambiophonics claim to be able to create the sense of full surround using just the two speakers), or at some other more or less sophisticated psycho-acoustic illusion, which as per usual will likely not work for everyone. Richard Dobson -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
That was mine. There are several demo tracks on the Ambiophonic website that you can download. But you should get the free Apple/Android(not free) Ambiophonic app or the free Hotto Transcoder and play your own favorite recordings via good speakers. Angelo Farina and others on the Sursound list know all about this and have contributed to advancing this technology. Ralph Glasgal -Original Message- From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Dobson Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 4:18 PM To: A discussion list for music-related DSP Subject: Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law? Unless I am completely mixing this up with some other system, I recall some demo soundfile you posted some while back (must have been via sursound) using two adjacent speakers, and getting a quasi-surround/widening effect. I recall it particularly, because just using my two toy Apple speakers either side of a round iMac (so hardly a definitive or rigorous test!) I actually got the effect quite clearly. If that was not yours, whose might it have been? Richard Dobson On 07/02/2012 20:59, Ralph Glasgal wrote: Ambiophonics (actually Panambiophonics) requires four speakers to reproduce a full 360 degrees of direct sound localization in the horizontal plane. It deliberately does not employ HRTFs. The basic program is RACE which stands for Recursive Ambiophonic Crosstalk Elimination. It is a shame that it is not a contraption within AudioMulch which would make it so easy to use in a 4.0 (DTS, etc.) surround application instead of having to use VST plugins in DAWs or Transcoders working under Java. The four speakers needed are quite easy to place. Just two in front spaced about 20 degrees (either side of a TV screen) and two behind the same and two independent copies of RACE running. You never need a front center speaker or a rear center either. (RACE is in the public domain.) For the record, Ambisonics and Wavefield Synthesis are the other Loudspeaker Binaural technologies that are HRTF free, but only Ambiophonics (including the Princeton version) is compatible with all existing 2.0, 5.1, 7.1, etc. media and formats. -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Re: [music-dsp] [OT] vinyl? No, thanks...
As a physicist and electrical engineer, I am not one who believes that analog or vinyl is inherently or mystically better than digital. In my experiments, perfecting Ambiophonics and giving demonstrations of loudspeaker binaural reproduction, I am often able to compare vinyl to digital recording media using binaural rather than stereo reproduction methods. That is, reproducing two channel recordings of differing vintages and media, using Ambiophonic software to recover and make audible all the ITD and ILD captured by the original microphones and later console processing. I also eliminate most pinna angle errors, and in some cases by using real concert hall IRs to generate signals for surround speakers, I have a much better chance of hearing all the localization, depth, and ambience data actually captured and stored on the given media. Ignoring, considerations of ticks and pops, tape hiss, and sometimes frequency response, I have been able to judge and compare hundreds of LPs, CDs, and DVDs just on the basis of how realistic a stage presence they deliver. That is, is there clarity, depth, full stage width out to almost 180 degrees (if an orchestra or chorus), and cocktail party effect (so I can concentrate on just one singer or instrument). (In the case of vinyl, ticks and pops are off in left field somewhere and are not frontal as in stereo reproduction, more like a cough or paper rattling at a live concert so comparisons to digital are perhaps fairer.) My remarks do not apply to recordings of a single vocalist and guitar, etc. since mono localization or quality is not the issue I am concerned with here. To make a long story short, in general the older the stereo LP the more realistic it seems to be, ignoring some frequency range issues. The reason seems to be that in the early days, the microphone setups were simpler, just two or three spaced omnis, coincident figure eights, or cardioids. Post processing was minimal with few or no spot mics mixed in. Today, too many digital recordings, have a lot of mono soloists or groups and the mic ITD and ILD is pan potted, spot mic'd, and then mixed to binaural garbage. They could not do this in the analog era and I believe it is this lack of such brutal psychoacoustic manipulation of the ITD and ILD that accounts for much of the preference for older vinyl exhibited by audiophiles. Since I use an ELP laser turntable to do these demos and its tick eliminator output is digital, the differences in psychoacoustic realism between different recordings or media cannot be due to analog versus digital. Of course I also have hundreds of CDs/DVDs that have preserved localization cues and have not been processed to death. You can hear some great samples by downloading them from the Ambiophonic website. There is no scientific reason why digital cannot always outperform analog. Ralph Glasgal www.ambiophonics.org -Original Message- From: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu [mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Ross Bencina Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2010 10:53 PM To: A discussion list for music-related DSP Subject: Re: [music-dsp] [OT] vinyl? No, thanks... Andrew Reilly wrote: On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 05:56:17PM +0100, Rainer Buchty wrote: On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Stephen Sinclair wrote: (Vinyl just sounds.. different.. better.. but I couldn't tell you why.) Jumping on this (being a long-time lurker on this list), I never believed the above statement until I bought some LPs which I also had on CD. Until I had my own kind of revelation playing the old Art of Noise LPs and CDs in comparison... My own CD-vs-LP revelation came a few years ago when I bought some sufficiently high-grade analog/digital IO gear, and had a go at digitising some of my favourite LPs. I noticed two things immediately: 1. replaying the PCM sounded *exactly* like the LP, and 2. the mean recorded level (in PCM) was *significantly* lower than the normal signal level of pre-recorded CDs. That's a great test :-) I could get the signal level back up towards CD-level by using compression of various sorts, but in doing so the result wound up sounding like the CD version, rather than the LP version. The obvious conclusion is that the LP mastering process has to use a different paradigm than that for CDs, since the limitations of excursion and dynamics are different. Agreed. I have friends who press new LPs and dub plates pretty regularly -- although this is indie and dance music, I imagine similar same processes would apply to audiophile material: When the masters are cut, the signal is compressed/tweaked to squeeze it in to the available dynamics of the medium and the cutting lathe -- this is done at the lathe, often under direction of the producer to get a decent dynamics/compression trade off. This is quite different from producing a digital master in a mastering studio and sending it off to the CD plant
