[Sursound] [OT] Audio material to sell
Hi all, We have a list of audio and acoustics material to sell, some of it related to 3D audio. If you are interested in any of these please contact me privately. * Core Audio microphone (A-format) + two-part foam windscreen * Microflown intensimetry probe (including signal conditioner and sphere callibrator) * BK Pulse Platform (including many components and microphones) * Loudspeaker Genelec 1037 (with carrying case) * Amplifier 5.1 Marantz SR 4003. Sorry for the spam, Daniel Arteaga -- Daniel Arteaga Scientific Director - Audio Barcelona Media Av. Diagonal 177, 08018 Barcelona Tel: (+34) 932 381 400 http://www.barcelonamedia.org ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Binaural Experiment
I had a look, but I have a few problems.. I don't seem able to play 1a. The test is not blind as the curious, like me, can see the file names in the source. The Longcat eg.1b is the clear winner. I cannot force myself to listen to that much filtered noise - it seems pointless and unpleasant! I have converted one of your files from Soundcloud to binaural (2x2 convolution with my Dummy head IRs): https://www.dropbox.com/s/k1iyum6zosl6o70/Paul%20Dirks%20-%20Johnny%27s%20Sky%20binaural.mp3 Regards, David. On 07/01/2014 14:08, Paul Dirks wrote: Dear All I see the most interesting things passing by in this mailing list. This made me decided to do my thesis about binaural localization. I have made two experiments to test three different binaural panners and the accuracy of the localization. 1. New Audio Technology, Spatial Audio Designer 2. Longcat, H3D Binauralizer 3. Encoder: Daniel Courville, Solo2b2 Decoder: Harpex Ltd, Harpex-b It would really help me if some of you would have 15min for this experiment for the links below. In the first one i ask the rate in the localization is good/bad in the second one i aks the fill in were the sound is percieved. http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1489998/Binaural-Localization-Experiment-1 (10 min) http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1488686/Binaural-Localization-Experiment-2 (15 min) All thanks for your time and you will see hear more from me in the mailing list Because we all same a nice and interesting subject. With Kind Regards, Paul Dirks ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Binaural Experiment
Hey David Thanks for your time. The survey loads some files very slow this is why the were not present. Not sure if Longcat is going to win, Harpex seems to do is the best When i listend i thought New Audio was the best. It's idd unpleasant next time i will take some other samples. and thanks for the file. gr Paul -- Paul Dirks Music (Audio Engineer Dj) T: 31+ 6 18691987 M: i...@pauldirksmusic.com W: www.pauldirksmusic.com s: https://soundcloud.com/pauldirks (Dj) s: https://soundcloud.com/pauldirksmusic (Audio Engineer) dw schreef op 2014-01-08 16:39: I had a look, but I have a few problems.. I don't seem able to play 1a. The test is not blind as the curious, like me, can see the file names in the source. The Longcat eg.1b is the clear winner. I cannot force myself to listen to that much filtered noise - it seems pointless and unpleasant! I have converted one of your files from Soundcloud to binaural (2x2 convolution with my Dummy head IRs): https://www.dropbox.com/s/k1iyum6zosl6o70/Paul%20Dirks%20-%20Johnny%27s%20Sky%20binaural.mp3 Regards, David. On 07/01/2014 14:08, Paul Dirks wrote: Dear All I see the most interesting things passing by in this mailing list. This made me decided to do my thesis about binaural localization. I have made two experiments to test three different binaural panners and the accuracy of the localization. 1. New Audio Technology, Spatial Audio Designer 2. Longcat, H3D Binauralizer 3. Encoder: Daniel Courville, Solo2b2 Decoder: Harpex Ltd, Harpex-b It would really help me if some of you would have 15min for this experiment for the links below. In the first one i ask the rate in the localization is good/bad in the second one i aks the fill in were the sound is percieved. http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1489998/Binaural-Localization-Experiment-1 (10 min) http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1488686/Binaural-Localization-Experiment-2 (15 min) All thanks for your time and you will see hear more from me in the mailing list Because we all same a nice and interesting subject. With Kind Regards, Paul Dirks ___ 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] Binaural Experiment
I had a similar problem with the BBC's efforts: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3/2011/12/the-festival-of-nine-lessons-and-carols-in-surround-sound.shtml In that case I could not dowload them and switch quickly between versions. All that I could usefully say is that they all sounded bad, and I could not determine which was worst! A bit like voting in an election.. I have a problem with band-filtered noise. I don't think it tell you anything very useful, as the results are only applicable to band-filtered noise, and often anechoic HRTFS are used too, this means it has zero relevance in everyday situations. Science! What can you do with it! I liked your voice, music and recording, although I am not a great Cash fan! On 08/01/2014 16:45, Paul Dirks wrote: Hey David Thanks for your time. The survey loads some files very slow this is why the were not present. Not sure if Longcat is going to win, Harpex seems to do is the best When i listend i thought New Audio was the best. It's idd unpleasant next time i will take some other samples. and thanks for the file. gr Paul ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Binaural Experiment
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:19:53PM +, dw wrote: I have a problem with band-filtered noise. I don't think it tell you anything very useful, as the results are only applicable to band-filtered noise, and often anechoic HRTFS are used too, this means it has zero relevance in everyday situations. Science! What can you do with it! Band-filtered noise can reveal how performance depends on requency range. In this test there is a serious problem: all the filtered noise examples have wideband transients at the start and end. This could completely invalidate the results. For example it could very well be that the transients can be located well but the noise itself not. To avoid that they'd need a short fade-in/out instead of being switched on and off. Apart from that, I found all three systems sounded rather horrible. 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] Binaural Experiment
On 08/01/2014 17:29, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:19:53PM +, dw wrote: I have a problem with band-filtered noise. I don't think it tell you anything very useful, as the results are only applicable to band-filtered noise, and often anechoic HRTFS are used too, this means it has zero relevance in everyday situations. Science! What can you do with it! Band-filtered noise can reveal how performance depends on requency range. In this test there is a serious problem: all the filtered noise examples have wideband transients at the start and end. This could completely invalidate the results. For example it could very well be that the transients can be located well but the noise itself not. To avoid that they'd need a short fade-in/out instead of being switched on and off. Agreed. I was not sure whether the glitches were my end, due streaming or something. Apart from that, I found all three systems sounded rather horrible. Agreed. There was a lot of colouration, and audible reverb without much distance, on some, Also you can't really determine direction when sounds are close to the head. Ciao, ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Proposal for a (relatively) simple FOA/HOA standard. Request for comments!
) formats... IV. Improved binaural representation via headphones Note that headphones with HT chips and motion-corrected binaural playback of surround sound (including 3D audio) could easily be realized, with available and actually quite affordable chips. Oculus Rift is the direct example for this, as this is a full (and certainly more complex) VR and gaming device. http://worthplaying.com/event/E3_2013/PostE3_2013/89888/ In its current state, the Oculus Rift is an amazing piece of work, and after decades of dealing with VR technology, it seems that we may finally see a VR unit that is going to get it right. Wikipedia writes about the Oculus Rift motion-tracking: Initial prototypes used a Hillcrest 3DoF head tracker that is normally 120 Hz, with a special firmware that John Carmack requested which makes it run at 250 Hz, tracker latency being vital due to the dependency of virtual reality's realism on response time. The latest version includes Oculus' new 1000 Hz Adjacent Reality Tracker that will allow for much lower latency tracking than almost any other tracker. It uses a combination of 3-axis gyros, accelerometers, and magnetometers, which make it capable of absolute (relative to earth) head orientation tracking without drift.[20][25] Now, apply the same or similar HT silicon (which is already very affordable) to HT/motion-tracking headphones... (I could give some detailled recommendations how to do this, but this is also one of the next steps... Nice to see that at least the video and gaming people have kept some sense for cool technology and seemingly weird ideas, so to speak. How many motion updates per second would a fluent head-tracking binaural decoder/decoding program actually requiere? Ye Ambisonics experts, what do you think or better know?! You would have to decode some UHJ/.AMB+ file and shift the soundfield relative to the head position, I guess. The head position needs some regular and frequent updates, what we easily get b y now. You could also track the absolute movements of persons within some area. Say: Your decoder program tracks the movements of the visitors in some museum or building, and plays the associated audio/explanations fitting to the current position. This is the dining hall of the castle, which was quite cold during winter, but warm or even hot during summer. Ok, this was a truly dull example... :-) ) Best regards Stefan Schreiber Lisbon ___ 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/20140108/aaca7542/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Proposal for a (relatively) simple FOA/HOA standard. Request for comments!
Stefan Schreiber wrote: ... I also wanted to provide some reasons why I propose certain features/elements, and some real discussion base. 5.1 won't go away, but the proposal (sound field format/SFF) is clearly both more powerful and flexible. It is also more complicated, we have to admit. (It is an open standard, in this sense different than Mpeg-H 3DA. Without being able to give any proof because you can't prepare unfinished states, I believe that SFF could/will be a lot simpler than Mpeg-H 3DA.) Prepare has to be replaced with compare, of course. Best, Stefan P.S.: But I will prepare the unfinished state theory of audio surround signals and standard proposals for a later article, or maybe a book... O:-) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20140108/25d5516a/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
