Re: [Sursound] Ambisonics decoder to hrtf with VR support
On 13 Mar 2015, at 10:19 pm, Jörn Nettingsmeier netti...@stackingdwarves.net wrote: On 03/09/2015 12:12 PM, Tobix wrote: I've read that ambisonics is good for listener in center, right? This means that if player can move the sound effect will be distorted? If you're using pre-rendered Ambisonics files, the listener will never move from the sweet spot, translations are impossible. What you do is track the rotations of the listener's head and rotate the rendering accordingly. If you want to do translations, you will have to render the scene in realtime. It's very much like 3D cinema: you can produce fixed content for a pre-defined viewpoint with a pair of spaced cams, but if you want to allow the viewer to move, you need to model the whole scene. There are techniques that with HOA will give you some translation. That being what makes it higher order. The way that openal handles source positions and listener is good for me, but could it be reproduced with ambisonics? Yes. Ambisonics can just as well be used as a realtime rendering format. But there is a tradeoff: if the number of discrete sources is small compared to the number of virtual speakers, direct rendering is cheaper. Consider the case of a virtual 3rd-order 3D rig, let's assume an icosahedron. The cost of decoding the 16ch B-format to 20 speaker feeds is negligible, but you will have to convolve those with 20 pairs of HRTFs, tracked in realtime. You do realise that you don't have to use virtual speakers for the actual audio. If you take the impulse response of each Ambisonic channel and pass it through the chain, then you can convolve directly with that. (What with the linear, time invariance). That means that you have to do 20 FFTs, multiplication for filtering and 2 IFFTs. Not saying that this will end up faster in all cases but a good thing to note. This rendering effort will be constant, regardless of the number of sound sources in your scene. So if it's just a few, it's easier to just convolve each source with the two HRTFs. At 20 sources, you're break-even, above that, 3rd order Ambi is cheaper. The situation changes a bit if you consider the diffuse field for reverb/ambience: it can be mixed into the Ambi signal at no extra cost, but if modeled with individual sources, it's expensive, because you need quite a few. Best, Jörn ___ 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. Regards Alexis. ___ 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] Dual hexagon using in-ceiling uppers and matching in-wall lowers
Hello All I am a long time lurker here, and have been interested in setting up an ambisonic listening room in my house for some time. I have finally got the courage to try, however the only room that I have available to use is multi-use and only of moderate size 20m^2 (3940*4750*2690mm) In order to be able to make the most of the space I have been thinking about using moderately high end in-wall and in ceiling speakers in an rectangular double-hexagon arrangement. My question here is two fold: 1 - Do you think that this is at all a good or interesting setup. Even with lots of work. I have a moderate undergraduate level of understanding of DSP and and have read almost everything that I can get my hands upon about both spherical harmonics and ambisonics and so feel able to write a custom decoder if I have to. 2 - If the answer to the first question is yes, do you think that the Noble-Fidelity L-85 LRCS (in ceiling) and L-82 (in wall lowers) would be an appropriate speaker for this purpose. If not what speaker would you recomend (if any). I am not attached to these speakers however I cannot afford much more than USD 300 for each speaker. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131216/8a2b9c8d/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Dual hexagon using in-ceiling uppers and matching in-wall lowers
Hi Joseph In terms of decoder I was intending to hack a hifi preamp with an 8 input-12output matrix 128k long fir filters. That is DFT the inputs, for each frequency in that fft multiply by a matrix, then do an IDFT on the output. Of course you do something a little more complicated in order to fix up latency problems. This, I think is the most general Ambisonic decoder that is possible at the moment. And if you play with the coefficients you can also do room correction, delay lines all in that framework. On Tuesday, December 17, 2013, Joseph Anderson wrote: Hello Alexis, A few things A) How were you planning on running your decoder? Write code from the ground up? Build your own hardware? If you're looking for something somewhat between 'off the shelf' and 'grow your own', you may like to have a look at the Ambisonic Toolkit package for SuperCollider. From the web page, SuperCollider is a programming language for real time audio synthesis and algorithmic composition. The new and the older pages are here: http://supercollider.github.io/ http://supercollider.sourceforge.net/ The page for the Ambisonic Toolkit is here: http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net B) On your decoder arrangement... I'd suggest you think about the bi-rectangle arrangement, which uses 8 loudspeakers. This can work well in a domestic situation. Four loudspeakers are placed in the horizontal plane (in a rectangle), and then two more on the ceiling and two on the floor. Imagine two planes bisecting each other: one horizontal and one vertical. The ATK has a wide variety of inbuilt decoders. This page lists them: http://doc.sccode.org/Classes/FoaDecoderMatrix.html For a bi-rectangle, you'd use the diametric decoder. For two hexagons, you'd use the periphonic decoder. The ATK also includes Near Field Compensation and Psychoacoustic Shelf Filtering, allowing you to implement classic, optimised decoders. Additionally, because SuperCollider is a programming language for audio synthesis and signal processing, you also get delay lines and multipliers (gain adjustment) to compensate for differences in loudspeaker distances. Hope this helps!! My best, Joseph Anderson j.ander...@ambisonictoolkit.net javascript:; http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net On 16 Dec 2013, at 1:25 am, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.comjavascript:; wrote: Hello All I am a long time lurker here, and have been interested in setting up an ambisonic listening room in my house for some time. I have finally got the courage to try, however the only room that I have available to use is multi-use and only of moderate size 20m^2 (3940*4750*2690mm) In order to be able to make the most of the space I have been thinking about using moderately high end in-wall and in ceiling speakers in an rectangular double-hexagon arrangement. My question here is two fold: 1 - Do you think that this is at all a good or interesting setup. Even with lots of work. I have a moderate undergraduate level of understanding of DSP and and have read almost everything that I can get my hands upon about both spherical harmonics and ambisonics and so feel able to write a custom decoder if I have to. 2 - If the answer to the first question is yes, do you think that the Noble-Fidelity L-85 LRCS (in ceiling) and L-82 (in wall lowers) would be an appropriate speaker for this purpose. If not what speaker would you recomend (if any). I am not attached to these speakers however I cannot afford much more than USD 300 for each speaker. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131216/8a2b9c8d/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; 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/20131216/2485a933/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; 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/20131217/f2349c8a/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Dual hexagon using in-ceiling uppers and matching in-wall lowers
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:13:15AM +1100, Alexis Shaw wrote: In terms of decoder I was intending to hack a hifi preamp with an 8 input-12output matrix 128k long fir filters. That is DFT the inputs, for each frequency in that fft multiply by a matrix, then do an IDFT on the output. 1. That's giant overkill, completely useless. Whatever you need as filtering in a decoder can be done easily with much shorter impulse response. Or even with some simple IIR filters. It is overkill for anything except room correction where you often need 1/2 second of filtering At 386khz that leads to a 128k fir filter 2. The method you propose (DFT, matrix, IDFT) is wrong, you'd need linear convolution which is not the same thing. No you are wrong here, convolusion in. The time domain is equivelent to multiplication in the Fourier domain. That is simple sampling theory. Look up the overlap and add method of fir filter implementation 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 javascript:; 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/20131217/326bfd22/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Dual hexagon using in-ceiling uppers and matching in-wall lowers
Hi Joseph. I am thinking of hacking the emotiva UMC-200, if I use the secondary zone DACs I should be able to get some reasonable quality out of it. Regards Alexis Shaw On Tuesday, December 17, 2013, Joseph Anderson wrote: Hello Alexis, Sounds like a fun project. What is the hardware you're hacking? My best, Joseph Anderson j.ander...@ambisonictoolkit.net javascript:; http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net On 16 Dec 2013, at 3:13 pm, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.comjavascript:; wrote: Hi Joseph In terms of decoder I was intending to hack a hifi preamp with an 8 input-12output matrix 128k long fir filters. That is DFT the inputs, for each frequency in that fft multiply by a matrix, then do an IDFT on the output. Of course you do something a little more complicated in order to fix up latency problems. This, I think is the most general Ambisonic decoder that is possible at the moment. And if you play with the coefficients you can also do room correction, delay lines all in that framework. On Tuesday, December 17, 2013, Joseph Anderson wrote: Hello Alexis, A few things A) How were you planning on running your decoder? Write code from the ground up? Build your own hardware? If you're looking for something somewhat between 'off the shelf' and 'grow your own', you may like to have a look at the Ambisonic Toolkit package for SuperCollider. From the web page, SuperCollider is a programming language for real time audio synthesis and algorithmic composition. The new and the older pages are here: http://supercollider.github.io/ http://supercollider.sourceforge.net/ The page for the Ambisonic Toolkit is here: http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net B) On your decoder arrangement... I'd suggest you think about the bi-rectangle arrangement, which uses 8 loudspeakers. This can work well in a domestic situation. Four loudspeakers are placed in the horizontal plane (in a rectangle), and then two more on the ceiling and two on the floor. Imagine two planes bisecting each other: one horizontal and one vertical. The ATK has a wide variety of inbuilt decoders. This page lists them: http://doc.sccode.org/Classes/FoaDecoderMatrix.html For a bi-rectangle, you'd use the diametric decoder. For two hexagons, you'd use the periphonic decoder. The ATK also includes Near Field Compensation and Psychoacoustic Shelf Filtering, allowing you to implement classic, optimised decoders. Additionally, because SuperCollider is a programming language for audio synthesis and signal processing, you also get delay lines and multipliers (gain adjustment) to compensate for differences in loudspeaker distances. Hope this helps!! My best, Joseph Anderson j.ander...@ambisonictoolkit.net javascript:; javascript:; http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net On 16 Dec 2013, at 1:25 am, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.comjavascript:; javascript:; wrote: Hello All I am a long time lurker here, and have been interested in setting up an ambisonic listening room in my house for some time. I have finally got the courage to try, however the only room that I have available to use is multi-use and only of moderate size 20m^2 (3940*4750*2690mm) In order to be able to make the most of the space I have been thinking about using moderately high end in-wall and in ceiling speakers in an rectangular double-hexagon arrangement. My question here is two fold: 1 - Do you think that this is at all a good or interesting setup. Even with lots of work. I have a moderate undergraduate level of understanding of DSP and and have read almost everything that I can get my hands upon about both spherical harmonics and ambisonics and so feel able to write a custom decoder if I have to. 2 - If the answer to the first question is yes, do you think that the Noble-Fidelity L-85 LRCS (in ceiling) and L-82 (in wall lowers) would be an appropriate speaker for this purpose. If not what speaker would you recomend (if any). I am not attached to these speakers however I cannot afford much more than USD 300 for each speaker. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131216/8a2b9c8d/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; javascript:; 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
Re: [Sursound] Dual hexagon using in-ceiling uppers and matching in-wall lowers
On Tuesday, December 17, 2013, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:53:23AM +1100, Alexis Shaw wrote: 1. That's giant overkill, completely useless. Whatever you need as filtering in a decoder can be done easily with much shorter impulse response. Or even with some simple IIR filters. It is overkill for anything except room correction where you often need 1/2 second of filtering At 386khz that leads to a 128k fir filter * 386 kHz ?? Even 192 is completely useless. * Half a second of room correction would be useful only at very low frequencies (unless you want to correct your bathroom). And if and when it is necesssary, that part of the frequency range can be processed at a much lower sample rate and require only a short filter. * And then, room correction would be done on the speaker signals, not on the complete matrix. The latter *is* possible of course, and would be ideal, *iff* you can derive the filters. Which would require measuring the room response in higher order Ambisonic format, not on option unless you have a EigenMike, and even then dubious. My other project is making an eigenmike type microphone using 1000 mems microphones I am intending to do that 2. The method you propose (DFT, matrix, IDFT) is wrong, you'd need linear convolution which is not the same thing. No you are wrong here, convolusion in. The time domain is equivelent to multiplication in the Fourier domain. That is simple sampling theory. Look up the overlap and add method of fir filter implementation You don't have to tell me that (as the author of zita-convolver). But DFT, multiply, IDFT without overlap (which is what the OP described) won't do it. Btw I am the op. 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 javascript:; 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/20131217/b800bf3d/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Spherical microphone array
Hello all. I was wondering what people thought of the usefulness of a 10cm diameter spherical microphone array with 1000 mems detectors. (I'm Thinking of using ADMP621s) I know that this has a kr of about 3.2 but with the large number of microphones I was thinking it might be possible to get a 4th order result without significant spatial aliasing. Especially if The pattern was chosen to minimise spatial aliasing. In order to complement this I was thinking of increasing the frequency response al lower frequencies with a second, open spherical array ala the work of the university of sydney. Do you think that this would be a worthwhile exercise. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131019/20ce7a44/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player
Do you need internal dacs. How many channels do you need implemented. I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote: That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2. -- Marc Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com javascript:; a écrit : Hello all, I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more) - something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping a multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ? Ideas ? best, Gus If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices: 2+2+2+2 = 8 4+4 = 8 2+2+2+2+ ... = maybe more even if it is 8+ ... = maybe more Good hunting, Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; 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/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player
I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a zynq 7020 processor. The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for academics and ~400 for commercial uses. This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They are likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS). Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital class D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware. Regards. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote: Hi Alexis, yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am thinking 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have something that could be easily customisable for more On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: Do you need internal dacs. How many channels do you need implemented. I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote: That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2. -- Marc Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com javascript:; javascript:; a écrit : Hello all, I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more) - something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping a multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ? Ideas ? best, Gus If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices: 2+2+2+2 = 8 4+4 = 8 2+2+2+2+ ... = maybe more even if it is 8+ ... = maybe more Good hunting, Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; javascript:; 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/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; 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/20130523/92db3b54/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; 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/20130523/f309bbc8/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Making a standalone 8ch player
I'm working on having this implement a 4th order ambisonic decoder. The cool thing here is that there is a dual core arm processor on board that can run linux, so I can have a 40 or more channel hardware interface and have it act as an output that takes a 4th order ambisonic signal from software. Or at least that is the idea. There actually seems to be enough io to output to well over 100 channels. And there Is a heap of DSP resources on this thing. I don't know how popular this would be or how much time it will take, however there Is a huge amount that can be done here. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Ben Bloomberg wrote: I have some FPGA code to drive 4 and 8 channel Burr Brown DACs (PCM3168a, PCM1608) I could pass along. It's quite messy and I haven't worked on it in a while (4 years) but it also implements a 3rd order ambisonic encoder/decoder and streaming input via USB. The coefficients are all stored in a LUT in onboard memory to avoid lots of multiplication/trig. It wouldn't be too hard to modify it to grab wavs from an SD card. I've been using the Nexys2 platform from digilent. FPGALink is a pretty cool USB library that does highspeed IO. PCM3168 is a tough chip to solder though... Ben On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.comjavascript:; wrote: I am working on a system that can drive 40 or so channels based on a zynq 7020 processor. The zedboard which is the dev kit i am working with costs 320 for academics and ~400 for commercial uses. This will then drive a series of dac boards that I am working on. They are likely to cost about 200 each for 8 channels (ESS). Cheaper dac boards could be invisiged, or even direct driving digital class D modulators. I am mainly working on the player-control hardware. Regards. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Augustine Leudar wrote: Hi Alexis, yes the box would need DA converters if thats what you mean. I am thinking 8 outputs to start with min 16 bit 44.1 but it would be nice to have something that could be easily customisable for more On 23 May 2013 14:08, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.comjavascript:;javascript:; wrote: Do you need internal dacs. How many channels do you need implemented. I am working on a solution to the same problem at the moment. On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Marc Lavallée wrote: That's an interesting idea: clustering Raspberry Pis with cheap 8 channels usb modules and jackd2. -- Marc Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com javascript:;javascript:; javascript:; a écrit : Hello all, I want to start making a standalone 8 channel player (maybe more) - something that can be used in museums, festivals etc for sound installations that can just be turned on and will instantly start looping a multichannel composition on an sd card. At the moment I am using rather unwieldly setups of small computers and multi channel soundcards such as RME and motu. Cables can easily be jogged loose and it would be nice to have something more robust and that staff can easily just turn on and off. So I have looked into the arduino (only 12 bit audio) and the raspberry pi but neither seem suitable . Systems already avaailable are ludicrously expensive (1000s of euros) Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to go about this - is there something maybe Im missing with the raspberry pi/ arduino that could be customised ? Perhaps a custom made circuit board ? Ideas ? best, Gus If you are thinking of wider applications I would really encourage you to go modular ... that is daisy chainable devices: 2+2+2+2 = 8 4+4 = 8 2+2+2+2+ ... = maybe more even if it is 8+ ... = maybe more Good hunting, Michael ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; javascript:; javascript:; 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/20130523/46a19a71/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; javascript:; 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/20130523/92db3b54/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu javascript:; javascript:; https
Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
For HRTF based sound, headphones work the best. The HRTF is the solution of the in-head effects. On 2 November 2012 14:07, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote: Richard Dobson wrote: The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear stereo as stereo. If the response to lack of perfection is always do nothing, nothing will be done. Alternatively, if you use those generic HRTFs, at least ~some~ people will be happy. BTW, the AES has just announced a project AES-X212 to develop a file format for HRTF data; The format will be designed to include source materials from different HRTF databases. See: http://www.aes.org/standards/**meetings/new-projects.cfmhttp://www.aes.org/standards/meetings/new-projects.cfm Richard Dobson The next and valid question is if stereo via headphones actually works so well at all... (Many people have problems, such as in-head effects, lack of perceived real space, etc.) If you would fix these problems, then you could probably also reproduce convincing binaural surround via headphones. Best, Stefan Schreiber On 31/10/2012 16:38, Martin Leese wrote: Peter Lennox wrote: Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural - skip the uhj altogether? Please, what is this generic binaural? Everyone has an individual HRTF. If you release binaural recording using a generic HRTF then it will work for some and not for others. There have been attempts to systemise HRTFs, so that you set about four different parameters to produce an individual HRTF, but they never caught on. Regards, Martin __**_ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursoundhttps://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound __**_ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/**mailman/listinfo/sursoundhttps://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20121102/11ca3cdc/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
