Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Michael Chapman]

> ...
>> Don't write about supposed patent trolls if your sources are "Forbes"
>> etc. (This is business press, they certainly don't have any real clue
>> about patents.)
>
> The article was written by the CEO of Article
> One Partners; she knows what she is talking
> about.
>
If self-(corporate)-promotion is what she was writing about, she
sure knows what she is talking about ;-)>
Just my impression ... but I'm not a Forbes reader, so perhaps
I misjudge.

M


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Stefan Schreiber]

Ok, the citings and links weren't presented in the desired form.

I guess this is because there was no clear ISO standard for HTML 
citings...(In fact, maybe this is because I was copying HTML to 
plain text format, forced by the sursound list owners to do so.  :-) )


Anyway, I am completely shocked that even HTML seems to be based on some 
ISO stuff.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Generalized_Markup_Language

HTML , XHTML 
, and XML 
 are all examples of SGML-based languages.


Shock, awe, trembling... O:-)

Good night,

Stefan



Stefan Schreiber wrote:


Marc Lavallée wrote:




Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial
standards using lots of patents. How Ambisonics can co-exist?

--
Marc

 

The MPEG is part of the International Standard Organisation (ISO), in 
fact it was founded by both ISO and IEC.



etc.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Stefan Schreiber]

Marc Lavallée wrote:




Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial
standards using lots of patents. How Ambisonics can co-exist?

--
Marc

 

The MPEG is part of the International Standard Organisation (ISO), in 
fact it was founded by both ISO and IEC.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iso

ISO has 162 national members 
,[2] 
 out of the 
205  total 
countries in the world.



In this context, I absolutely don't understand what the term 
"propietary" standard means. A standard has to be defined, and somebody 
has to be responcible. The ISO is an international organization formed 
by national standard committees.
If I buy some lights (I even don't use the word lightbulb...), it is a 
good thing that these work in different countries, and there are no 
mechanical problems if I want to install the. It is a good thing if 
railway lines have the same width in different places countries, airport 
communications works everywhere with available equipment, etc.



Respective to Mpeg, I greatly admire the work they have done for 
video/TV etc. If you should have used "free" Divx;-) or x264, these are 
still based on MPEG's work. So what?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_Picture_Experts_Group

The direct forerunner was the Joint Photographic Experts Group. 
Everybody uses their format, how it seems...



Now, it seems to me that Ambisonics and MPEG audio easily could co-exist.


Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial
standards using lots of patents.



Propietary is actually wrong, because you can license ISO standards 
under known terms.


---
But anyway, you are really not informed at all... Because the ISO is 
issuing lots of open standards, which matter literally everywhere.


http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/

ISO /IEC    JTC1 
/SC22 /WG21 
 is the international 
standardization working group for the programming language C++.



Yeah, you never should use this programming language again.

But then, things might get even more complicated for you to avoid THEIR 
standads...



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_%28programming_language%29

In 1989 the American National Standards Institute 
 
published a standard for C (generally called "ANSI C 
" or "C89"). The next year, the 
same specification was approved by the International Organization for 
Standardization 
 
as an international standard (generally called "C90"). ISO later 
released an extension to the internationalization 
 
support of the standard in 1995, and a revised standard (known as "C99 
") in 1999. The current version of 
the standard (now known as "C11 
") was 
approved in December of 2011.




So, now you know what evil ANSI and evil ISO are, and maybe even you are 
using some stuff of these evil, commercial guys. This is hard to avoid. 
Even the bytecodes for text messages are coded in evil ANSI and ISO way, 
which proves my case.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Character_Set

The International Organization for Standardization 
 
(ISO) set out to compose the universal character set in 1989


...

Damned... The ISO Capitalists (or Communists?!) took over, and nobody 
stopped them when it was time!


;-)


Bye,

Stefan




___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] an exploratory mail

[Stefan Schreiber]

Hi Gabriel,

I would like to give some short commentaries inside your text, open for 
further discussion...


Gabriel Wolf wrote:


Dear Sursounders,

the initial post of "A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec 
..." by Stefan Schreiber put all the things together so clearly and 
nicely. MPEG-H 3D Audio might be the beginning of commercial 
breakthrough in 3D audio. Ambisonics has been there since the 70's. We 
all know its outstanding advantages. The public doesn't know.



Thanks for the warm words... Obviously we do agree.





Auro-3D and IOSONO don't have to be *replaced* -- Ambisonics has to be 
*added*.




Nothing will be or should be < replaced >, but here a short reality check:

I am pretty sure that IOSONO won't be part of the MPEG standard, nor 
does this have to be.


Iosono is already a defined and partially propietary technology. It 
works since some time as a true 3D audio rendering technology. After 
doing a little bit research I would say that IOSONO (specifications not 
avaiable to me...) can't use "original" WFS over whole the upper 
hemisphere, because otherwise they should need something like 90.000 
loudspeakers. This doesn't seem to be the case, so what are they 
actually doing for the "vertical" rendering part?   I am eager to learn 
something about, cos they don't tell this on their webpage...;-)


And this is the difference between a 3D format < to be defined >, and 
IOSONO. Iosono can be used to render 3D soundscapes, a "better 5.1 
representation for every listener/spectator" in the cinema, etc.
But IOSONO doesn't seem to define a 3D audio format for general use. 
(Correct me if I am wrong about...)


Auro-3D: My impression is that Auro-3D < will be included > as part of 
the MPEG-H standard. (At least it seems they have applied to become part 
of the standard.)




Ambisonic's problem was, that there had to be an expensive physical 
decoder. This changed. Nowadays every 3D audio format needs to be 
decoded. Even Dolby realized, that decoding arbitrary speaker feeds is 
indispensable to next generation 3D audio.



There still has to be a physical decoder in the cinema, a surround 
decoder (receiver) at home, or an AMB --> binaural decoder for headphone 
use - this one maybe including head-tracking technology and HT feedback 
to the decoder.




This is a chance we only have once: Ambisonics being included in a 
world wide standard - for free!
But it will not happen magically by itself. This list has so much 
manpower. If we are all pulling together, we can do it. It is possible.


I already try my best to make this happen, and certainly there are more 
people.


IMO, Ambisonics is really in such a mature state that this really < 
should > be included into MPEG-H. They will include some binaural 
techniques, for sure.


(I have given some feedback to MPEG via another person and company 
during last summer, stressing that surround sound might enter the mass 
market if we/they find a convincing way in representing surround sound / 
3D audio via headphones. Especially if we look into the real-world 
habits of people, looking to the crazy amount of mobile devices around...


Secondly, I stated that Ambisonics is about the oldest form of 3D audio. 
It is a speaker-independent technology, which is an advantage in an 
increasingly heterogeneous environment of loudspeaker layouts.


Thirdly, Ambisonics might be the most efficient way to represent 
surround sound/3D audio. Even if this is hard to prove in a scientific 
way, there are definitively some facts which give my opinion some base. 
You can't represent 2D surround in less than 3 channels, and 3D audio in 
less than 4 channels. Ambisonics does this; I leave the strict proof of 
"maximum efficiency" for Prof. Greene, who now has some serious work to 
do...:-)


If you're feeling addressed >> get in touch with me off-list 
(ecr...@gmail.com)

Please consider:

1. How much time are you willing to invest?
2. What is your expertise? What do you do best?
3. What is your motivation? 



From your posting, it is actually not completely clear what you want to 
achieve:


- To include Ambisonics/.AMB/HOA into MPEG-H?

The ISO/MPEG would not care for any of these questions. Safe bet.

- Or to start some "open project", which would probably have to include 
some reference to open hardware?


This is a possibility, and I have thought about this.

A place where open standardization could  be done would be here:

http://xiph.org/

Note that Vorbis and Flac are audio codecs, Opus is actually an official 
Internet audio codec. (The other one is ITU G.711, the old PCM 
"telephone codec".)



It is possibly best to see what will happen in Genève, at least for my 
part...



Best regards,

Stefan

P.S.: The IETF itself might have some interest in surround sound/3D 
audio transmission.


Better Internet radio?!   Maybe not yet, but stay tuned... O:-)






___
Sursound mailing li

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Marc Lavallée]

Stefan Schreiber  a écrit :

> >As for Java, it is now a free software and its
> >implementation for Android (Dalvik), is free too. 
> >
> Really?! Java is not free, unless you are referring (only) to the 
> programming language. (Libraries? VM?)

Hi Stephan.

The Java language and its specifications are free, the Gnu classes are
free, the Dalvik VM is free, and most of the Oracle (Sun)
implementation is free. That's not so bad.

> I was (obviously) aware of Ubuntu, Firefox OS etc.

Obviously.

> >Android is "open" for both the industry and the (tech savvy) users.
> >We can install our own software on tons of different Android devices.
> >Users can install free software without the Google Market app, using
> >the F-Droid app, or manually with apk packages.
> >
> 
> It doesn't work always, and therefore is a hack. (Because 
> manufacturers/providers try to lock the system.)

Apps from the F-Droid "market" works on many Android phones and
devices. Phones from providers can be "rooted" and reflashed, but I was
thinking more about other kinds of SoC devices that we can buy (and
proudly hack).

> Have you ever installed a "free Android update"?;-)

No. Do you mean free as beer?

> >My point is that it's possible to build
> >ambisonics players using cheap technologies with free software only;
> >there's maybe an opportunity to develop a parallel "industry" for
> >ambisonics content and delivery (I'm being naïve and idealistic).
> 
> I am abolutely in favour of this, "even" considering that a free3D
> audio codec could be developped without the MPEG, or say outside the
> MPEG.

Great!
 
> Currently, I try to evaluate what is happening...
>
> Best,
> 
> Stefan

Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial
standards using lots of patents. How Ambisonics can co-exist?

--
Marc

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] an exploratory mail

[Gabriel Wolf]

Actually by me, back in 2000, along with the CDP Toolkit which enabled
AMB files to be created:

http://people.bath.ac.uk/masrwd/bformat.html

The Ambisonic community sort of discovered it a while later.

Oh I see. That was before I joined Sursound.


Ambisonic's "problem" was that people were happy, a posteriori, to agree
that AMB was inadequate, but were unable to agree on what a proper HOA
format should comprise, except inasmuch as plain old 3rd order 3D (the
maximum AMB supports) was not good enough.

Not good enough in terms of ...?


I fully expect, if detailed
discussion resumes yet again, that disagreements will dominate the
dialogue.

Maybe it has been like that before. Sometimes things change. Let's talk.


My personal thought is that the suggestion made for 3rd-order
+ 2nd order height should be amply sufficient for MPEG's purposes.

How about give that a chance?

Regards,
Gabriel Wolf
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Martin Leese]

Stefan Schreiber wrote:
...
> Don't write about supposed patent trolls if your sources are "Forbes"
> etc. (This is business press, they certainly don't have any real clue
> about patents.)

The article was written by the CEO of Article
One Partners; she knows what she is talking
about.

...
>>..." a staggering 89% of all patents reviewed by the USPTO are judged
>>either partly or wholly invalid."
>
> Patent applications, right?

No, patents.  They are invalidated when prior
art is uncovered
.
...
> Anyway, I still have to hear which patents should apply to HOA...

I don't know of any.  MAG published the details
of HOA long ago, so the prior art is well
established.  What conceivably could be
patented is novel techniques for decoding (as
were Vienna decoders for first-order, and
Trifield for stereo).

Regards,
Martin
-- 
Martin J Leese
E-mail: martin.leese  stanfordalumni.org
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc today ?

[Eric Benjamin]

> what was the first commercial multichannel sound card
I don't know what the first was, but in 2000 I used an Echo Layla 24 to put 
together an 8-channel system with an old 100 MHz Pentium PC  (Barely enough CPU 
power.  I had to trim the OS to get it to work in real time).  Before the 
Layla24 there was a Layla20 (just called the Layla), introduced in 1997.  
Before 
that I used two CardDeluxes strapped together to get 4-channel I/O in a PC. 
 Driver support wasn't great.


- Original Message 
From: Miguel Negrao 
To: Surround Sound discussion group 
Sent: Mon, January 21, 2013 9:24:06 AM
Subject: [Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc 
today ?

Hi

Does anyone know the answer to this question ?  

With 3 RME HDSPe MADI FX it appears to be possible to have 576 channels of 
output.  Would the pci-e bus be able that amount of data ? Has anyone ever 
built 
such a system ?

I’m asking because I wanted to know what was the maximum theoretical number of 
channels possible in one pc today vs to around 1997, which appeared to be 24 
(3x 
DIGI32/8).

Also, does anyone know what was the first commercial multichannel sound card  
(that could be used by any windows app) ? I see that the RME DIGI32/8 with 8 
channels output was launched in 1997 for windows 95 and NT.

best,
Miguel
http://www.friendlyvirus.org/miguelnegrao/




___
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] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc today ?

[Charlie Richmond]

On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Augustine Leudar <
augustineleu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> P.S. YOu might want to get in touch with a guy called Steve Barbar of
> LARES-Lexicon  they apparently have buil WFS synthesis systems of 600+
> channels with tracking for the actors in theatre productions using the
> SoundMan-Server
> software.Charlie
> Richmond<
> http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=18994563&authType=name&authToken=ByAa&invAcpt=&goback=%2Emid_I355804063*475_*1
> >ofRichmond
> Sound Design Ltd should also be able to put you in touch with the
> right people .
>

That is basically correct and I am on this list obviously.  Please feel
free to contact me directly, details below.

Sincerely,
Charlie

* Charlie Richmond - Richmond Sound Design - Skype: charlierichmond
* http://www.RichmondSoundDesign.com
<http://www.richmondsounddesign.com/> "Performance
for the Long Run"
* SoundMan-Server & AudioBox II - Virtual Sound System Core Audio Engine
* LinkedIn & Twitter:
charlierichmond<http://www.linkedin.com/in/charlierichmond> *
Facebook:
charlie.richmond
* G+: 
https://plus.google.com/u/0/117175238910652375011/<https://plus.google.com/u/0/117175238910652375011/posts>
* RSD on Google+: https://plus.google.com/101997019719186030659/
* Primary and much preferred method of communication is via skype
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130121/0625343f/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc today ?

[Augustine Leudar]

P.S. YOu might want to get in touch with a guy called Steve Barbar of
LARES-Lexicon  they apparently have buil WFS synthesis systems of 600+
channels with tracking for the actors in theatre productions using the
SoundMan-Server
software.Charlie
Richmond<http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=18994563&authType=name&authToken=ByAa&invAcpt=&goback=%2Emid_I355804063*475_*1>ofRichmond
Sound Design Ltd should also be able to put you in touch with the
right people .

On 21 January 2013 17:23, Miguel Negrao <
miguel.negrao-li...@friendlyvirus.org> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Does anyone know the answer to this question ?
>
> With 3 RME HDSPe MADI FX it appears to be possible to have 576 channels of
> output.  Would the pci-e bus be able that amount of data ? Has anyone ever
> built such a system ?
>
> I’m asking because I wanted to know what was the maximum theoretical
> number of channels possible in one pc today vs to around 1997, which
> appeared to be 24 (3x DIGI32/8).
>
> Also, does anyone know what was the first commercial multichannel sound
> card  (that could be used by any windows app) ? I see that the RME DIGI32/8
> with 8 channels output was launched in 1997 for windows 95 and NT.
>
> best,
> Miguel
> http://www.friendlyvirus.org/miguelnegrao/
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130121/f20e92c6/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc today ?

[Augustine Leudar]

Im not sure if this answers your question but this motherboard for example
will take three pcie cards :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131821

so should be able to handle 576 channels over 3 rme cards, You would of
course need a very fast processor and ssd drive but it should still be less
data than some high end video applications. Im not sure if there is a limit
on theamount of audio channels on windows 7 but you should be allright in
linux

On 21 January 2013 17:23, Miguel Negrao <
miguel.negrao-li...@friendlyvirus.org> wrote:

> Hi
>
> Does anyone know the answer to this question ?
>
> With 3 RME HDSPe MADI FX it appears to be possible to have 576 channels of
> output.  Would the pci-e bus be able that amount of data ? Has anyone ever
> built such a system ?
>
> I’m asking because I wanted to know what was the maximum theoretical
> number of channels possible in one pc today vs to around 1997, which
> appeared to be 24 (3x DIGI32/8).
>
> Also, does anyone know what was the first commercial multichannel sound
> card  (that could be used by any windows app) ? I see that the RME DIGI32/8
> with 8 channels output was launched in 1997 for windows 95 and NT.
>
> best,
> Miguel
> http://www.friendlyvirus.org/miguelnegrao/
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
>



-- 
07580951119

augustine.leudar.com
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130121/3b523a13/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] an exploratory mail

[Richard Dobson]

On 21/01/2013 17:22, Gabriel Wolf wrote:

Dear Sursounders,

...


We did standardisation before. AMB has been declared by Martin Leese
seven years ago (if I remember correctly). It has been worked out.



Actually by me, back in 2000, along with the CDP Toolkit which enabled 
AMB files to be created:


http://people.bath.ac.uk/masrwd/bformat.html

The Ambisonic community sort of discovered it a while later.

..


Ambisonic's problem was, that there had to be an expensive physical
decoder. This changed. Nowadays every 3D audio format needs to be
decoded. Even Dolby realized, that decoding arbitrary speaker feeds is
indispensable to next generation 3D audio.

This is a chance we only have once: Ambisonics being included in a world
wide standard - for free!
But it will not happen magically by itself. This list has so much
manpower. If we are all pulling together, we can do it. It is possible.




Ambisonic's "problem" was that people were happy, a posteriori, to agree 
that AMB was inadequate, but were unable to agree on what a proper HOA 
format should comprise, except inasmuch as plain old 3rd order 3D (the 
maximum AMB supports) was not good enough. I fully expect, if detailed 
discussion resumes yet again, that disagreements will dominate the 
dialogue.  My personal thought is that the suggestion made for 3rd-order 
+ 2nd order height should be amply sufficient for MPEG's purposes.


Richard Dobson






___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

[Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in one single pc today ?

[Miguel Negrao]

Hi

Does anyone know the answer to this question ?  

With 3 RME HDSPe MADI FX it appears to be possible to have 576 channels of 
output.  Would the pci-e bus be able that amount of data ? Has anyone ever 
built such a system ?

I’m asking because I wanted to know what was the maximum theoretical number of 
channels possible in one pc today vs to around 1997, which appeared to be 24 
(3x DIGI32/8).

Also, does anyone know what was the first commercial multichannel sound card  
(that could be used by any windows app) ? I see that the RME DIGI32/8 with 8 
channels output was launched in 1997 for windows 95 and NT.

best,
Miguel
http://www.friendlyvirus.org/miguelnegrao/




___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

[Sursound] an exploratory mail

[Gabriel Wolf]

Dear Sursounders,

the initial post of "A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec 
..." by Stefan Schreiber put all the things together so clearly and 
nicely. MPEG-H 3D Audio might be the beginning of commercial 
breakthrough in 3D audio. Ambisonics has been there since the 70's. We 
all know its outstanding advantages. The public doesn't know.


Now this could change.

An MPEG-standard is a huge thing. Many, many people are involved in 
creating it and once finished it has its own life: beeing accepted, 
hacked or ignored.


We did standardisation before. AMB has been declared by Martin Leese 
seven years ago (if I remember correctly). It has been worked out. 
Software in many flavours has been coded. All necessary ingredients seem 
to be availible. Let's take part in building the MPEG standard!


Auro-3D and IOSONO don't have to be *replaced* -- Ambisonics has to be 
*added*.


Ambisonic's problem was, that there had to be an expensive physical 
decoder. This changed. Nowadays every 3D audio format needs to be 
decoded. Even Dolby realized, that decoding arbitrary speaker feeds is 
indispensable to next generation 3D audio.


This is a chance we only have once: Ambisonics being included in a world 
wide standard - for free!
But it will not happen magically by itself. This list has so much 
manpower. If we are all pulling together, we can do it. It is possible.



If you're feeling addressed >> get in touch with me off-list 
(ecr...@gmail.com)

Please consider:

1. How much time are you willing to invest?
2. What is your expertise? What do you do best?
3. What is your motivation?

If there is enough resonance, I will do my best in organizing the thing.

As for me:
I'm 28 years old, grown up in munich. I live in berlin. I lurk on this 
list for about 10 years. To graduate high school I had to write a 
skilled work in physics. As theme I chose: Ambisonics. In DIY style I 
mounted 4 schoeps mk4 in a tetrahedron and did some nice concert 
recordings in first order B-Format. I do linux and mac os. I have a 
classical education in piano and singing. Last year I graduated SAE as 
audio engineer. Maybe we saw each other at IRCAM 2010, ICSA 2011 or TMT.


Best regards,
Gabriel Wolf
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Stefan Schreiber]

Marc Lavallée wrote:


Stefan Schreiber  a écrit :

 


The Android OS is "open", although not entirely:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29#Licensing

 


Very closely controlled by Google, even if being based on Linux and
some (propietary) hack of Java?
   



Yes, developed and controlled by Google (because it owns the Android
copyright...). 




As for Java, it is now a free software and its
implementation for Android (Dalvik), is free too. 

Really?! Java is not free, unless you are referring (only) to the 
programming language. (Libraries? VM?)



Android is a big
step in the right direction (as least in terms of licensing). Google is
huge, but there are other free OSes based on Linux for phones and small
devices, that started long before Android. Also, Ubuntu is now
targeting the phone and tablet market (without using Java).
 



I was (obviously) aware of Ubuntu, Firefox OS etc.

 

Now I don't hate Android, but what about any Linux where you can't 
install your own software? This is supposedly  "open"?   Not entirely 
open? (Laughing...)


(Answer: "Open" for the industry, not user. )
   



Android is "open" for both the industry and the (tech savvy) users. We
can install our own software on tons of different Android devices.
Users can install free software without the Google Market app, using
the F-Droid app, or manually with apk packages.
 



It doesn't work always, and therefore is a hack. (Because 
manufacturers/providers try to lock the system.)


Have you ever installed a "free Android update"?;-)

 


The Replicant OS is a fork of Android, using only free software
(except from some bootloaders and drivers):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicant_%28operating_system%29
 



Most mainstream phones work with non-free drivers and bootloaders, but
there are some phones and SoC (system on a chip) devices that are
providing free drivers. 



From "most" to "some" phones, but if I think on which Android is based 
it looks like an accident.:-)



My point is that it's possible to build
ambisonics players using cheap technologies with free software only;
there's maybe an opportunity to develop a parallel "industry" for
ambisonics content and delivery (I'm being naïve and idealistic).
 



I am abolutely in favour of this, "even" considering that a free3D audio 
codec could be developped without the MPEG, or say outside the MPEG.


Currently, I try to evaluate what is happening...


Best,

Stefan
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

[Marc Lavallée]

Stefan Schreiber  a écrit :

> >The Android OS is "open", although not entirely:
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29#Licensing
> >  
> 
> Very closely controlled by Google, even if being based on Linux and
> some (propietary) hack of Java?

Yes, developed and controlled by Google (because it owns the Android
copyright...). As for Java, it is now a free software and its
implementation for Android (Dalvik), is free too. Android is a big
step in the right direction (as least in terms of licensing). Google is
huge, but there are other free OSes based on Linux for phones and small
devices, that started long before Android. Also, Ubuntu is now
targeting the phone and tablet market (without using Java).

> Now I don't hate Android, but what about any Linux where you can't 
> install your own software? This is supposedly  "open"?   Not entirely 
> open? (Laughing...)
> 
> (Answer: "Open" for the industry, not user. )

Android is "open" for both the industry and the (tech savvy) users. We
can install our own software on tons of different Android devices.
Users can install free software without the Google Market app, using
the F-Droid app, or manually with apk packages.

> >The Replicant OS is a fork of Android, using only free software
> >(except from some bootloaders and drivers):
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicant_%28operating_system%29

Most mainstream phones work with non-free drivers and bootloaders, but
there are some phones and SoC (system on a chip) devices that are
providing free drivers. My point is that it's possible to build
ambisonics players using cheap technologies with free software only;
there's maybe an opportunity to develop a parallel "industry" for
ambisonics content and delivery (I'm being naïve and idealistic).

> Well, if speaking about patents, the world's top innovators are 
> companies like IBM et al. Samsung files far more patents than Apple
> and Google, BTW. The latters earn their money mostly via software -
> patents never were decisive.

True.

> Don't write about supposed patent trolls if your sources are "Forbes" 
> etc. (This is business press, they certainly don't have any real clue 
> about patents.)

True, I don't have a patent to write on this forum... ;-) The patenting
system is crucial to the business world, so my bet is that Forbes knows
enough about it. The article is citing sources. 

> I don't care about Apple's litigation problems. (They had many
> patents cancelled, recently. I know this for sure. )

Apple is enforcing its patents as much as it can; it's scary enough.

> >..."small and midsize companies with less than $1 billion in revenues
> >now constitute 90% of the unique defendants in patent troll suits.
> >Firms with less than $100 million in revenue represent 66% of the
> >defendants."
> >  
> >
> Yeah. If everybody who comes is a "troll", you feel confirmed when
> you never pay.

There are a few legitimate patents, and some are even filled to protect
ideas from trolls, for the public interest. Invalidating patents is of
course the other way to protect public interest (see www.pubpat.org)

> >..." a staggering 89% of all patents reviewed by the USPTO are judged
> >either partly or wholly invalid."
> >  
> 
> Patent applications, right?

11% of applications were accepted after reexamination; the patent
system is a gigantic litigation industry. It drains a lot of energy.
 
> >The "next generation surround" is anything we want, but I hope that
> >ambisonics will stay patent free.
> 
> Now, this also doesn't make real sense to me. Either the patents have 
> been filed in the past and stay valid, or not.

Patents are expiring. Like any manufactured product with a shelf life.

> To claim that the original Ambisonics patents were applied by patent 
> trolls is what some people would like to hear, but I beg to differ.  
> They weren't trolls...  :-D

No, they were not trolls, but their patents seemed useless. Maybe
someone can explain how patents actually helped Ambisonics, and it will
help in the future.

> Anyway, I still have to hear which patents should apply to HOA...
> (Maybe there are some, but it is better to know any real facts than
> to talk about patent trolls and FUD issues at night-time)

Here's a good start for your search:
http://www.google.com/search?tbm=pts&q=ambisonics

--
Marc
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound