Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? (Robert Greene)
4. More composers are starting to look at ambisonics though there is still some resistance to it , mainly I think because its hard to get your head around. I'm still trying to work out why stereo diffusion into multiple speakers is more popular to many composers than ambisonics and multichannel mixing that is a phenomenon i haven't been able to figure out either :) why do people still fall for the BEAST? very simple explanation ... diffusion exploits the acoustic of the performance space. Ambisonics and other similar approaches *challenge* the acoustic of the performance space. Dennis Smalley (interview with Austin 2000) describes diffusion as ... ‘the “sonorising” of the acoustic space’. In other words ... the acoustic/performance space acts like an instrument ... you *play* it. With ambisonics you have to overcome/neutralise the acoustics of the performance space. Etienne -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/882e0be9/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? (Robert Greene)
On 4 Apr 2012, at 06:29, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/03/2012 03:16 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote: 4. More composers are starting to look at ambisonics though there is still some resistance to it , mainly I think because its hard to get your head around. I'm still trying to work out why stereo diffusion into multiple speakers is more popular to many composers than ambisonics and multichannel mixing that is a phenomenon i haven't been able to figure out either :) why do people still fall for the BEAST? jörn (with apologies to the birmingham crew ;) Ahem... http://scottwilson.ca/scottwilson.ca/News_and_Events/Entries/2010/10/27_Rethinking_the_BEAST.html So I'd say stereo diffusion is rather less popular than it used to be, at least in my immediate vicinity. Seriously though, I think stereo diffusion remains in use because it is very pragmatic, and is surprisingly effective in creating a vivid sonic image. It is not one which is the same for everyone in the audience, but it is one which can be effective for a given piece of music despite those differences. Gary Kendall has some interesting things to say about why in his article in the same issue of OS. I think that distinction, which I'll crudely describe as (musically) effective vs. consistent and 'realistic', is worth keeping in mind in many cases when spatialising audio. Often the former matters a *lot* more than the latter. But I think the real question is why do people still fall for ambisonics? ducking for cover... ;-) S. __ Dr. Scott Wilson Senior Lecturer in Music (Composition and Live Electroacoustic Music) Head of Postgraduate Studies, Research School of Languages, Cultures, Art History, and Music University of Birmingham +44 (0)121 414 5767 Music Department University of Birmingham Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom Home: http://scottwilson.ca Music Dept: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/music BEAST: http://www. birmingham.ac.uk/beast BEASTmulch: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/BEAST/research/mulch.aspx COMPASS: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/compass -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/2af6634c/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
The rather fabulous Harpex plugin does this very well. www.harpex.net jon On 4 Apr 2012, at 09:13, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music
Unless of course they publish a file format for it Want a minimal and purposely highly (even overtly) extensible one? That I can design. In fact I've meant to do something like this from teenage up. :) Please do! A group of us proposed a CAF based file format at Graz (in 2009) http://mchapman.com/amb/reprints/AFF.pdf It had a mixed response ;-) It has though been taken forward and a further proposal was made at the US Ambisonics symposium by Christian Nachbar (Graz) and colleagues. (N3D instead of SN3D, being one major change.) Time has brought greater agreement and stability. As I wasn't at York, and as the Graz folks are on this List, I won't give a reference as it would probably be out-of-date, anyway. So problem solved Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? (Robert Greene)
On 4 Apr 2012, at 06:29, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/03/2012 03:16 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote: 4. More composers are starting to look at ambisonics though there is still some resistance to it , mainly I think because its hard to get your head around. I'm still trying to work out why stereo diffusion into multiple speakers is more popular to many composers than ambisonics and multichannel mixing that is a phenomenon i haven't been able to figure out either :) why do people still fall for the BEAST? jörn (with apologies to the birmingham crew ;) Ahem... http://scottwilson.ca/scottwilson.ca/News_and_Events/Entries/2010/10/27_Rethinking_the_BEAST.html So I'd say stereo diffusion is rather less popular than it used to be, at least in my immediate vicinity. Seriously though, I think stereo diffusion remains in use because it is very pragmatic, and is surprisingly effective in creating a vivid sonic image. It is not one which is the same for everyone in the audience, but it is one which can be effective for a given piece of music despite those differences. Gary Kendall has some interesting things to say about why in his article in the same issue of OS. I think that distinction, which I'll crudely describe as (musically) effective vs. consistent and 'realistic', is worth keeping in mind in many cases when spatialising audio. Often the former matters a *lot* more than the latter. But I think the real question is why do people still fall for ambisonics? ducking for cover... ;-) because of the eroticism of the promise of the illusion of reality, as supported by mathematical elegance! That's a half-tongue-in-cheek answer because we know that one reason ambisonics is still here is because it 'works'. But for composers ... its not just about the technology working ... its also about how the technology *mediates* the act of composition. For diffusion-type systems, there is a strong relationship between the technology, space, and composition. But ambisonics has the challenge of 'realism'. What is the relationship between realism and music? How does the promise of the illusion of reality mediate the act of composition? If one was to argue that music is essentially representational / referential / symbolic (which is a difficult argument in itself) then, in a way, the realism might compete/conflict with the music. For example, a (musically created) gradual reduction in volume can represent a sounding object moving away into the distance but if that movement in distance is not simulated ambisonicaly, then that representation reduces the coherence of the auditory scene ... and the illusion of realism is weakened. Thus ... the symbolism in the music competes with the illusion of realism. Etienne S. __ Dr. Scott Wilson Senior Lecturer in Music (Composition and Live Electroacoustic Music) Head of Postgraduate Studies, Research School of Languages, Cultures, Art History, and Music University of Birmingham +44 (0)121 414 5767 Music Department University of Birmingham Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT United Kingdom Home: http://scottwilson.ca Music Dept: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/music BEAST: http://www. birmingham.ac.uk/beast BEASTmulch: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/facilities/BEAST/research/mulch.aspx COMPASS: http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/compass -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/2af6634c/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- http://etiennedeleflie.net -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/bfd06172/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? (Robert Greene)
On 4 Apr 2012, at 6:29 am, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: that is a phenomenon i haven't been able to figure out either :) why do people still fall for the BEAST? jörn (with apologies to the birmingham crew ;) Doh! Not sure I really want to enter the melee here! For me, I came to Ambisonics in large part through the soundfield microphone. If you have lots of loudspeakers, and want to do multichannel work, what is a sensible way to make a recording? Then, you also get soundfield manipulation techniques, too--which give a very good handle on working w/ space as a compositional parameter. (And are analogous to the stereo techniques I was using before.) Another nice thing is that Ambisonics doesn't assume a particular playback format. Full 3D, horizontal only, stereo... these all work. Often, I end up doing 'old-fashioned' BEAST style stereo diffusion... (now ducking for cover) j ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Hello Moritz, If you're up for getting into SuperCollider, we've just released the Ambisonic Toolkit as an SC3 library: www.ambisonictoolkit.net/ We've included three different sets of binaural decoders, using two measured sets (IRCAM Listen, UC Davis CIPIC) and a synthetic head set. On 4 Apr 2012, at 9:13 am, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] New Schoeps/Illusonic decoder plug-in
There's a new Schoeps/Illusonic decoder plug-in for Double-MS that incorporates some Illusonic processes. It could be used to decode B-Format if the B-format is transcoded beforehand to Double-MS. http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/dms_plugin_bf The plug-in is free. - Daniel ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music
The 2011 paper by Nachbar, et al, ambiX - A Suggested Ambisonics Format, specifies SN3D as the normalization scheme. (see eqn 3 in section 2.1, The normalization that seems most agreeable is SN3D...) The papers are here http://ambisonics.iem.at/proceedings-of-the-ambisonics-symposium-2011 -- Aaron Heller (hel...@ai.sri.com) Menlo Park, CA US On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote: Unless of course they publish a file format for it Want a minimal and purposely highly (even overtly) extensible one? That I can design. In fact I've meant to do something like this from teenage up. :) Please do! A group of us proposed a CAF based file format at Graz (in 2009) http://mchapman.com/amb/reprints/AFF.pdf It had a mixed response ;-) It has though been taken forward and a further proposal was made at the US Ambisonics symposium by Christian Nachbar (Graz) and colleagues. (N3D instead of SN3D, being one major change.) Time has brought greater agreement and stability. As I wasn't at York, and as the Graz folks are on this List, I won't give a reference as it would probably be out-of-date, anyway. So problem solved Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music
Thanks the correction. Yes, the move was N3D _to_ SN3D. Three years on from the original proposal and one on from the improvements, hopefully this is stable ( ... unless there any seismic improvemnts at York ???). Michael The 2011 paper by Nachbar, et al, ambiX - A Suggested Ambisonics Format, specifies SN3D as the normalization scheme. (see eqn 3 in section 2.1, The normalization that seems most agreeable is SN3D...) The papers are here http://ambisonics.iem.at/proceedings-of-the-ambisonics-symposium-2011 -- Aaron Heller (hel...@ai.sri.com) Menlo Park, CA US On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 1:48 AM, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote: Unless of course they publish a file format for it Want a minimal and purposely highly (even overtly) extensible one? That I can design. In fact I've meant to do something like this from teenage up. :) Please do! A group of us proposed a CAF based file format at Graz (in 2009) http://mchapman.com/amb/reprints/AFF.pdf It had a mixed response ;-) It has though been taken forward and a further proposal was made at the US Ambisonics symposium by Christian Nachbar (Graz) and colleagues. (N3D instead of SN3D, being one major change.) Time has brought greater agreement and stability. As I wasn't at York, and as the Graz folks are on this List, I won't give a reference as it would probably be out-of-date, anyway. So problem solved Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Blumlein versus ORTF
Last night I coded up a quick experiment in using the Kemar mannequin HRTFs published by Algazi, et al. at UC Davis. http://interface.cipic.ucdavis.edu/sound/hrtf.html It is very simple... simulate Blumlein pickup and playback though speakers at +/- 45 degrees, low-pass at 800 Hz, and use cross-correlation to estimate the ITDs, and compare to the natural hearing case. The result is here http://www.ai.sri.com/ajh/ITDs_Blumlein_vs_Natural/ I was pleasantly surprised that such a simple experiment yield such a clean result. The 800 Hz LPF is needed to get reliable results from the crosscorrelation. As you point out, humans may use the higher frequency information (I'd like to see a citation for that), but the point here is that accurate ITDs are present in the ear signals in stereo playback even though the soundfield has been sampled at a single point in space. The MATLAB code is here: http://www.ai.sri.com/ajh/ITDs_Blumlein_vs_Natural/itd_blumlein_plot.m As Eric has pointed out, Braanch (and many others) have done much more on this, for example: Braasch, Jonas, A Binaural Model to Predict Position and Extension of Spatial Images Created with Standard Sound Recording Techniques, AES Preprint 6610. http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=13352 http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=13352 -- Aaron Heller (hel...@ai.sri.com) Menlo Park, CA US On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Robert Greene gre...@math.ucla.edu wrote: Thanks everybody for the links and in particular the calculation of models link. I shall work on that one I know the Lipshitz paper well, but it seems that experts disagree. James Johnston has told me a number of times for example that he thinks getting those time cues from ORTF is really important and that pure Blumlein is really not the way to go because they are missing. So... in this corner expert 1, Stanley L and in the opposite corner expert 2 ,JJ. What's a body to do? Thanks again Robert ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Hi All, thanks a lot for your replies. Harpex-B is quite expensive - I like to try Tetraproc, but I am not sure how to run it on my mac without Linux... Do you have an advice? The SC3 library looks very nice as well. I will give it a try! Thank you, Moritz Am 04.04.2012 um 13:27 schrieb Joseph Anderson: Hello Moritz, If you're up for getting into SuperCollider, we've just released the Ambisonic Toolkit as an SC3 library: www.ambisonictoolkit.net/ We've included three different sets of binaural decoders, using two measured sets (IRCAM Listen, UC Davis CIPIC) and a synthetic head set. On 4 Apr 2012, at 9:13 am, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Hi All, thanks a lot for your replies. Harpex-B is quite expensive - I like to try Tetraproc, but I am not sure how to run it on my mac without Linux... Do you have an advice? There were instructions on ambisonia.com. (For installation, running is easy ...) Not sure if anyone has them elsewhere? Or you could try archive.org If you get stuck, do get in touch off list ... but it is years since I did my installation. Fons (whose creation it is), I know does not support Mac as he does not have the hardware. His software (Tetraproc, that is) runs fine on Mac though. Michael The SC3 library looks very nice as well. I will give it a try! Thank you, Moritz Am 04.04.2012 um 13:27 schrieb Joseph Anderson: Hello Moritz, If you're up for getting into SuperCollider, we've just released the Ambisonic Toolkit as an SC3 library: www.ambisonictoolkit.net/ We've included three different sets of binaural decoders, using two measured sets (IRCAM Listen, UC Davis CIPIC) and a synthetic head set. On 4 Apr 2012, at 9:13 am, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] DTS files (was Re: Can anyone ...)
Hi David, Thanks for listening and writing. All these recordings were made at the Troy Savings Bank Music Hall in upstate NY and broadcast on NPR's Performance Today about 8-10 years ago. As for the distortion, frankly I have not listened to the DTS versions that carefully. Last night, I decoded the Brahms using VLC Player and note that the DTS version does sound coarser than the original. The masters are 48kHz, so the DTS encoding also includes a sample rate conversion to 44.1 kHz, and I'm not sure about the quality of the SRC in the Surcode DTS encoder. I've uploaded the B-format files from which the DTS files were made, if you'd like to listen to those http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/AMB/ The free Harpex player makes that particularly easy (and you can play with different virtual mic arrays). http://harpex.net/ In my humble option, the Stravinsky Pulcinella recording is the best of the lot. It was made with my MkIV (#99) when it still had the original Calrec capsules and alignment. The Beethoven is from the same concert and is the one I listen to the most often. The Dvorak recording was made after an overhaul by Soundfield Research that included a capsule replacement, and the Brahms after further tweaking by Richard Lee and Eric Benjamin. Thanks Aaron On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM, David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote: At 14:01 02/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote: I put some files at http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/DTS/ I downloaded, cut onto CD and listened to the finale of Brahms I, which I have conducted several times (where was this recorded?). It is the first time I have heard 4.0 from a CD and for some reason it took me a long time to establish a volume level. The wide dynamic range is nice. The instrumental timbres are realistic, and it is terrific to hear the applause from all around -- something that one unfortunately doesnt get with the DVD recordings of the Sylvester concert from the Musikverein. The image seemed stable. The worst aspect was the distortion (most noticeable just after Letter N from 12:10), which I take to be the 16-bit granularity. I will listen to more of these. Thanks! David ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please? (Robert Greene)
Michael Chapman wrote: Think it is generally agreed that feeding too many speakers for the given 'prder' of ambisonics is not a good idea. So more than six for first order would be deprecated ... I have not found this to be the case, at least in the setups we use here at Derby. I regularly use 8 speakers for horizontal only 1st order Ambisonics, and in larger rooms, I would recommend this number! Of course, this also allows me to demo 2nd and 3rd order on the same rig. cheers Dr Bruce Wiggins Creative Technologies Research Group http://www.derby.ac.uk/staff-search/dr-bruce-wiggins Lecturer in Electronics and Sound http://www.derby.ac.uk/eee http://www.derby.ac.uk/music On 3 April 2012 15:25, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote: So I am nervously edging towards the following conclusions : 1. Music can be mixed ambisonically and then decoded or bounced down to Speaker configurations like 5.1, 7.1 ,1100.12 , stereo whatever. Think it is generally agreed that feeding too many speakers for the given 'prder' of ambisonics is not a good idea. So more than six for first order would be deprecated ... 2. This can all be done with software - there is no need for specialist decoders or hardware - Yes making it more a tool for mixing than a product that needs to be marketed to the public. See other thread ;-) Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/b605c9fe/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 05:26:35PM -, Michael Chapman wrote: There were instructions on ambisonia.com. (For installation, running is easy ...) Not sure if anyone has them elsewhere? Or you could try archive.org If you get stuck, do get in touch off list ... but it is years since I did my installation. Fons (whose creation it is), I know does not support Mac as he does not have the hardware. His software (Tetraproc, that is) runs fine on Mac though. There is an OSX Makfile in the Tetraproc sources. Provided you have the compilation tools and the required libraries (which also have an OSX Makefile), it will compile and install in a few seconds. The 'binaural' output of Tetraproc should be taken with a grain of salt. When you enable the Xtalk option on the stereo output, a first order highpass filter is inserted into the difference (L-R) signal. This has the effect, at LF, to turn amplitude differences into phase differences. It's a crude approximation to binaural, and doesn't include any pinnae effects. Its primary purpose is for headphone monitoring during live recording. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Hello, I was also wondering what other techniques exist to perform this B-Format to binaural conversion other than what I've been already doing: decoding the B-Format signal to a virtual 3D speaker array placed using HRTF IRs for each speaker location. Are there any ways of going directly from B-Format to binaural without doing the virtual speakers? Best, Hector On 2012-04-04, at 4:13 AM, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Schoeps/Illusonic decoder plug-in
Le 12-04-04 07:54, Daniel Courville a écrit : It could be used to decode B-Format if the B-format is transcoded beforehand to Double-MS. Here's a little B-Format to Double-MS transcoder: http://www.radio.uqam.ca/ambisonic/b2dms_transcoder.zip. VST and AU, Mac OS only. If you never installed SonicBirth, you need the SonicBirth framework for the transcoder to work: http://www.radio.uqam.ca/ambisonic/sonicbirth_fw_1.3.1b2.zip. - Daniel ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] DTS files (was Re: Can anyone ...)
Thanks for all this, Aaron. I get the message: You don't have permission to access /AMB/LvB-Sym4-Mvt1.amb on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. But only with the Beethoven files. My normal method of playing first order is to load B format WXY .wav files into Samplitude, matrix them and add shelf filters, but I have not yet successfully discovered how to convert the .amb files to .wav files. I should be grateful for a few pointers. David At 12:56 04/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote: Hi David, Thanks for listening and writing. All these recordings were made at the Troy Savings Bank Music Hall in upstate NY and broadcast on NPR's Performance Today about 8-10 years ago. As for the distortion, frankly I have not listened to the DTS versions that carefully. Last night, I decoded the Brahms using VLC Player and note that the DTS version does sound coarser than the original. The masters are 48kHz, so the DTS encoding also includes a sample rate conversion to 44.1 kHz, and I'm not sure about the quality of the SRC in the Surcode DTS encoder. I've uploaded the B-format files from which the DTS files were made, if you'd like to listen to those http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/AMB/ The free Harpex player makes that particularly easy (and you can play with different virtual mic arrays). http://harpex.net/ In my humble option, the Stravinsky Pulcinella recording is the best of the lot. It was made with my MkIV (#99) when it still had the original Calrec capsules and alignment. The Beethoven is from the same concert and is the one I listen to the most often. The Dvorak recording was made after an overhaul by Soundfield Research that included a capsule replacement, and the Brahms after further tweaking by Richard Lee and Eric Benjamin. Thanks Aaron On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM, David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote: At 14:01 02/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote: I put some files at http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/DTS/ I downloaded, cut onto CD and listened to the finale of Brahms I, which I have conducted several times (where was this recorded?). It is the first time I have heard 4.0 from a CD and for some reason it took me a long time to establish a volume level. The wide dynamic range is nice. The instrumental timbres are realistic, and it is terrific to hear the applause from all around -- something that one unfortunately doesnt get with the DVD recordings of the Sylvester concert from the Musikverein. The image seemed stable. The worst aspect was the distortion (most noticeable just after Letter N from 12:10), which I take to be the 16-bit granularity. I will listen to more of these. Thanks! David ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
On 04/04/2012, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote: Hi All, thanks a lot for your replies. Harpex-B is quite expensive - I like to try Tetraproc, but I am not sure how to run it on my mac without Linux... Do you have an advice? There were instructions on ambisonia.com. (For installation, running is easy ...) As we said at the conference, we're working on it - it'll be back up before t long :-) Dave -- These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer Dave Malham http://music.york.ac.uk/staff/research/dave-malham/%20 Music Research Centre Department of Music The University of York Heslington York YO10 5DD UK Phone 01904 322448 Fax 01904 322450 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/ ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] B-Format to Binaural
Hi Hector, In one of my talks with Michael Gerzon (or, rather, one of my listening to MAG sessions - he talked, I listened and tried to understand), he hinted that there was a more direct path, but didn't elaborate further. Given that you can encode HRTF's in a spherical harmonic framework (Evans, Michael J.; Angus, James A. S.; Tew, Anthony I.Spherical Harmonic Spectra of Head-Related Transfer Functions, AES Convention:103 (September 1997) Paper Number:4571) and you already have the soudfield in a spherical harmonic framework, maybe all you need to do is . Dave On 04/04/2012, Hector Centeno hcen...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I was also wondering what other techniques exist to perform this B-Format to binaural conversion other than what I've been already doing: decoding the B-Format signal to a virtual 3D speaker array placed using HRTF IRs for each speaker location. Are there any ways of going directly from B-Format to binaural without doing the virtual speakers? Best, Hector On 2012-04-04, at 4:13 AM, Moritz Fehr wrote: Dear List members, over the past months, I have been following this group with great interest. I would like to ask you if you can give me some advice on converting B-Format recordings to a binaural format for reproducing the spatial impression of my recordings on headphones. Mostly, I am recording with a Tetramic. I am looking for useful tools for doing this conversion on a mac. Thank you very much, Moritz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120404/e0770986/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer Dave Malham http://music.york.ac.uk/staff/research/dave-malham/%20 Music Research Centre Department of Music The University of York Heslington York YO10 5DD UK Phone 01904 322448 Fax 01904 322450 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/ ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] DTS files (was Re: Can anyone ...)
On 5 April 2012 02:22, David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote: My normal method of playing first order is to load B format WXY .wav files into Samplitude, matrix them and add shelf filters, but I have not yet successfully discovered how to convert the .amb files to .wav files. I should be grateful for a few pointers. Don't you just change the extension? Dave David At 12:56 04/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote: Hi David, Thanks for listening and writing. All these recordings were made at the Troy Savings Bank Music Hall in upstate NY and broadcast on NPR's Performance Today about 8-10 years ago. As for the distortion, frankly I have not listened to the DTS versions that carefully. Last night, I decoded the Brahms using VLC Player and note that the DTS version does sound coarser than the original. The masters are 48kHz, so the DTS encoding also includes a sample rate conversion to 44.1 kHz, and I'm not sure about the quality of the SRC in the Surcode DTS encoder. I've uploaded the B-format files from which the DTS files were made, if you'd like to listen to those http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/AMB/ The free Harpex player makes that particularly easy (and you can play with different virtual mic arrays). http://harpex.net/ In my humble option, the Stravinsky Pulcinella recording is the best of the lot. It was made with my MkIV (#99) when it still had the original Calrec capsules and alignment. The Beethoven is from the same concert and is the one I listen to the most often. The Dvorak recording was made after an overhaul by Soundfield Research that included a capsule replacement, and the Brahms after further tweaking by Richard Lee and Eric Benjamin. Thanks Aaron On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 6:12 PM, David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote: At 14:01 02/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote: I put some files at http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/DTS/ I downloaded, cut onto CD and listened to the finale of Brahms I, which I have conducted several times (where was this recorded?). It is the first time I have heard 4.0 from a CD and for some reason it took me a long time to establish a volume level. The wide dynamic range is nice. The instrumental timbres are realistic, and it is terrific to hear the applause from all around -- something that one unfortunately doesnt get with the DVD recordings of the Sylvester concert from the Musikverein. The image seemed stable. The worst aspect was the distortion (most noticeable just after Letter N from 12:10), which I take to be the 16-bit granularity. I will listen to more of these. Thanks! David ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer Dave Malham Music Research Centre Department of Music The University of York Heslington York YO10 5DD UK Phone 01904 322448 Fax 01904 322450 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
