Re: [Sursound] Orah

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 04/08/2016 08:00 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:


Finally, a 3D camera with an integrated FOA microphone?
https://www.orah.co/tech-specs/

https://www.orah.co/about/ :
"In addition, the ambisonic 3D sound capture capabilities of Orah
enable the viewer of the content to locate the origin of the sound
source with a VR headset, bringing the feeling of immersion to a
stunning new level."

https://www.orah.co/ :
Looking at the pictures and captions, it says: "Immersive Sound, Four
high dynamic-range microphones for ambisonic 3D sound". The capsules
(or mems?) look soldered on the sides of PC boards, listening through
holes.


very far apart, with body resonances that i don't want to imagine.
hate to be negative about so much exciting new tech, but "stick n>=4 
cheap capsules somewhere and call it ambisonic" seems questionable to 
me. simple truth of the matter is that as long as video techs add mics 
as an afterthought, the results are going to suck, badly.



--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

[Sursound] Orah

[Marc Lavallee]

Finally, a 3D camera with an integrated FOA microphone?
https://www.orah.co/tech-specs/

https://www.orah.co/about/ :
"In addition, the ambisonic 3D sound capture capabilities of Orah
enable the viewer of the content to locate the origin of the sound
source with a VR headset, bringing the feeling of immersion to a
stunning new level."

https://www.orah.co/ :
Looking at the pictures and captions, it says: "Immersive Sound, Four
high dynamic-range microphones for ambisonic 3D sound". The capsules
(or mems?) look soldered on the sides of PC boards, listening through
holes.

--
Marc
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this

[len moskowitz]

John Leonard write:


This info came through from a colleague in the USA, although the 
company appears to based in Poland.







http://audioimmersion.pl/







Anyone else been contacted? 


 
I saw it at AES and am on their mailing list.


It has a rather large diameter.


Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of TetraMic


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 04/08/2016 04:26 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote:



They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent
input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable
decision, given the extremely cramped space and the thermal
challenges inside the sphere. It does not leave much room for error
though, so they better get their analog gains right.


It makes sense. Thanks.

So what 96kHz refers to?


96 kHz is probably due to the marketing department looking for something 
that suggests "hi-resolution"...


--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[umashankar manthravadi]

They do mention ambisonics

umashankar

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Marc Lavallee<mailto:m...@hacklava.net>
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 7:57 PM
To: sursound@music.vt.edu<mailto:sursound@music.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@stackingdwarves.net> wrote:

> On 04/08/2016 02:10 PM, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@stackingdwarves.net> wrote :
> >
> >> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The FAQ says:
> >>> "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >>>
> >>> I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
> >>
> >> let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things
> >> scientific.
> >>
> >> 96/16 = 6
> >> 48/24 = 2
> >>
> >> so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!
> >
> > Of course! Hertz per bit... Or is it bit per hertz?
> > What's better for marketing? More bits of more hertz?
>
> More per bit per second!
>
> They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent
> input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
> restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable
> decision, given the extremely cramped space and the thermal
> challenges inside the sphere. It does not leave much room for error
> though, so they better get their analog gains right.

It makes sense. Thanks.

So what 96kHz refers to?

For the record, the Eigenmike is bandlimited to 20kHz, and the
recommended sampling frequency is 44.1kHz.

--
Marc
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160408/1c9b7389/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Marc Lavallee]

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote:

> On 04/08/2016 02:10 PM, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote :
> >  
> >> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:  
> >>>
> >>> The FAQ says:
> >>> "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >>>
> >>> I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.  
> >>
> >> let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things
> >> scientific.
> >>
> >> 96/16 = 6
> >> 48/24 = 2
> >>
> >> so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!  
> >
> > Of course! Hertz per bit... Or is it bit per hertz?
> > What's better for marketing? More bits of more hertz?  
> 
> More per bit per second!
> 
> They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent 
> input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then 
> restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable
> decision, given the extremely cramped space and the thermal
> challenges inside the sphere. It does not leave much room for error
> though, so they better get their analog gains right.

It makes sense. Thanks.

So what 96kHz refers to?

For the record, the Eigenmike is bandlimited to 20kHz, and the
recommended sampling frequency is 44.1kHz. 

--
Marc
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Bo-Erik Sandholm]

Multi direction binaurals?s?

http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/T-H-E-Audio/BS-3D

Or beamforming ?
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp==5346535=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5346535

http://www.mhacoustics.com/products

Bo-Erik
On 8 Apr 2016 16:06, "David Pickett" <d...@fugato.com> wrote:

> At 15:13 08-04-16, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>
> They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent
>> input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
>> restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable decision,
>> given the extremely cramped space and the thermal challenges inside the
>> sphere. It does not leave much room for error though, so they better get
>> their analog gains right.
>>
>
> It is not clear to me what exactly they are aiming to record with this
> device.
>
> David
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160408/b43f1a22/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[John Leonard]

Well, according to the FAQ, anything and everything! The demo video just shows 
two people sitting opposite one another with almost complete separation, but it 
would seem that surround is also an option via software. Just out of interest, 
I’ve applied to join the beta team, but haven’t heard anything as yet.

If anything does turn up, I’ll report back.

Cheers,

John

Please note new email address & direct line phone number
email: j...@johnleonard.uk
phone +44 (0)20 3286 5942


> On 8 Apr 2016, at 15:00, David Pickett  wrote:
> 
> At 15:13 08-04-16, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> 
>> They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent input 
>> noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then restricting the 
>> word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable decision, given the extremely 
>> cramped space and the thermal challenges inside the sphere. It does not 
>> leave much room for error though, so they better get their analog gains 
>> right.
> 
> It is not clear to me what exactly they are aiming to record with this device.
> 
> David
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.
> 
> __This email has been 
> scanned by Netintelligencehttp://www.netintelligence.com/email
> 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[David Pickett]

At 15:13 08-04-16, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:

They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they 
know their equivalent input noise is at 30 dB 
SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then 
restricting the word length to 96 dB is a 
perfectly reasonable decision, given the 
extremely cramped space and the thermal 
challenges inside the sphere. It does not leave 
much room for error though, so they better get their analog gains right.


It is not clear to me what exactly they are aiming to record with this device.

David

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 04/08/2016 02:10 PM, Marc Lavallée wrote:

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote :


On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:


The FAQ says:
"audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"

I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.


let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.

96/16 = 6
48/24 = 2

so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!


Of course! Hertz per bit... Or is it bit per hertz?
What's better for marketing? More bits of more hertz?


More per bit per second!

They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent 
input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then 
restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly reasonable decision, 
given the extremely cramped space and the thermal challenges inside the 
sphere. It does not leave much room for error though, so they better get 
their analog gains right.




--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[umashankar manthravadi]

It still hertz – Wireless World headline in the 60s

umashankar

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Marc Lavallée<mailto:m...@hacklava.net>
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 5:40 PM
To: sursound@music.vt.edu<mailto:sursound@music.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@stackingdwarves.net> wrote :

> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >
> > The FAQ says:
> > "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >
> > I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
>
> let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.
>
> 96/16 = 6
> 48/24 = 2
>
> so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!

Of course! Hertz per bit... Or is it bit per hertz?
What's better for marketing? More bits of more hertz?

> (i held it during the april foolery, but now it must out :)

(it's never too late for a 3 times better joke)
--
Marc


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160408/9f10c545/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Marc Lavallée]

On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote :

> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >
> > The FAQ says:
> > "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >
> > I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
> 
> let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.
> 
> 96/16 = 6
> 48/24 = 2
> 
> so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!

Of course! Hertz per bit... Or is it bit per hertz?
What's better for marketing? More bits of more hertz?

> (i held it during the april foolery, but now it must out :)

(it's never too late for a 3 times better joke) 
--
Marc


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:


The FAQ says:
"audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"

I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.


let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.

96/16 = 6
48/24 = 2

so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!

(i held it during the april foolery, but now it must out :)


--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] [Warning! advertisement] Hefio earphones

[Politis Archontis]

I guess that’s their target application, you start with a physical flat 
response, and then the user can apply a personalized target response that he 
wants. That can be perceptual equalization, stereo widening filters, hrtfs, 
etc. I think they offer some equalizatio or flitering tools for that. The 
virtual monitoring application you mentioned is another, and then there are 
more specialized applications of more audiological interest, where you need to 
control the stimuli that reaches the ear drum.

But I shouldn’t be speaking for them, if somebody’s interested you should 
contact them, I’m sure they’ll be more than happy to answer all questions.

Regards,
Archontis


> On 08 Apr 2016, at 09:52, Steven Boardman <boardroomout...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I kind of guessed that after posting,  but the marketing l read appeared
> just to push only the flat response. Which i suppose to most people sounds
> like a great idea on its own. The thing is, without a personalised HRTF,
> they are likely to sound worse to most people.  Well at least the frequency
> response won't sound flat.
> I personally use headphones that sound flat to me,  or where I know where
> the deficiencies are.
> Another method is to A/B with a known speaker set up,  and eq the
> headphones until they match. Unfortunately this is trial and error. So I do
> see the value of these, if one has HRTF set that matches, or has been
> learnt.
> 
> Best
> 
> Steve
> On 7 Apr 2016 10:53 pm, "Politis Archontis" <archontis.poli...@aalto.fi>
> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Steve,
>> 
>> I guess the idea is that if you equalize the response of the
>> headphones/earphones, then you can apply the target response you need
>> without undesired modifications by the headphones, and that can be
>> individualized HRTFs if you have them, which include the effects you
>> mentioned.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Archontis
>> 
>>> On 08 Apr 2016, at 00:32, Steven Boardman <boardroomout...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Not sure one needs actual flat response at the ear drum.
>>> Surely it needs to sound like the torso,  head,  pinna and ear canal have
>>> filtered the sound before we think its flat?
>>> 
>>> Best
>>> 
>>> Steve
>> 
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
>> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> 
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160408/77836259/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] [Warning! advertisement] Hefio earphones

[Steven Boardman]

I kind of guessed that after posting,  but the marketing l read appeared
just to push only the flat response. Which i suppose to most people sounds
like a great idea on its own. The thing is, without a personalised HRTF,
they are likely to sound worse to most people.  Well at least the frequency
response won't sound flat.
I personally use headphones that sound flat to me,  or where I know where
the deficiencies are.
Another method is to A/B with a known speaker set up,  and eq the
headphones until they match. Unfortunately this is trial and error. So I do
see the value of these, if one has HRTF set that matches, or has been
learnt.

Best

Steve
On 7 Apr 2016 10:53 pm, "Politis Archontis" <archontis.poli...@aalto.fi>
wrote:

> Hi Steve,
>
> I guess the idea is that if you equalize the response of the
> headphones/earphones, then you can apply the target response you need
> without undesired modifications by the headphones, and that can be
> individualized HRTFs if you have them, which include the effects you
> mentioned.
>
> Regards,
> Archontis
>
> > On 08 Apr 2016, at 00:32, Steven Boardman <boardroomout...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Not sure one needs actual flat response at the ear drum.
> > Surely it needs to sound like the torso,  head,  pinna and ear canal have
> > filtered the sound before we think its flat?
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Steve
>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160408/77836259/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.