Re: [Sursound] [off-topic] Spirals
Ta - looks interesting - there's always someone who's been there before;} Chris Woolf On 08/03/2023 16:21, Marc Lavallée wrote: The article is freely available here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20080042307 Marc Le 2023-03-08 à 11 h 15, Picinali, Lorenzo a écrit : Hello Chris, this might be interesting for you! https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/154193120805200103?casa_token=CptzIp9vOaQA:fG10j5X-vgVL92L3YHFjBTRAyYUCHfVpsuYDrU3DcGX4wPgzym4ZZoLHSh2I2AfvIZrEyKpIQ54 I remember they also presented this work at ICAD in Paris in 2008, and if I remember well they won the best paper award! Best Lorenzo -- Lorenzo Picinali Reader in Audio Experience Design<https://www.axdesign.co.uk/> Dyson School of Design Engineering Imperial College London Dyson Building Imperial College Road South Kensington, SW7 2DB, London E: l.picin...@imperial.ac.uk http://www.imperial.ac.uk/people/l.picinali https://www.axdesign.co.uk/ https://www.sonicom.eu/ From: Sursound on behalf of Chris Woolf Sent: 08 March 2023 16:03 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Sursound] [off-topic] Spirals *** This email originates from outside Imperial. Do not click on links and attachments unless you recognise the sender. If you trust the sender, add them to your safe senders list https://spam.ic.ac.uk/SpamConsole/Senders.aspx to disable email stamping for this address. *** Bringing things round in a circle (rather than a spiral) Anyone any ideas how one could provide an audio horizon that could be a mimic of the gyro artificial horizon? That could presumably add an additional warning of unintentional spiralling, and one that would signal a discrepancy between gravitational/centrifugal pull and absolute vertical. I can see the problems of providing a height dimension with headphones, and also a question of what audio signals would have sufficient rate to provide the frequency of stimulus needed. ATC and TCAS would be some help but I think you would need rather more than just that. This is just coffee-time thoughts - I'm not planning to go flying any time soon;} Chris Woolf On 08/03/2023 13:23, t.mich...@posteo.de wrote: Hi Panos! First of all: Welcome! Second: YES you are definitely in the right place. Third: If you have any question, feel invite to ask. :-) Take care and stay healthy Cheers Thorsten Am 08.03.2023 00:08 schrieb Panos Kouvelis: I recently subscribed to this mailing list for insightful discussions on surround sound. Up 'till now, the material I have received is about aviation. Am I in the wrong place? :-) *Pan Athen* SoundFellas <https://soundfellas.com/>, *MediaFlake Ltd <http://mediaflake.com/>* Digital Media Services, Content, and Tools On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 1:03 AM Sampo Syreeni wrote: On 2023-02-22, Fons Adriaensen wrote: And in many cases the aircraft may very well be unstable in that axis: if left alone, the roll angle will slowly increase. Actually, most modern aircraft are stable in the bank axis as well. Part of why they have swept wings, bent wings and wingtips and the like, is to this regard. (Part of: most of it has to with approaching transonic flight. But not all.) The thing is though, and as you say below, the pilot won't feel anything weird when approaching a spiral. The built in stability of the airplane will keep everybody in their seat at 1g acceleration perpendicular to the floor, evenas the airplane banks to something approaching 90 degrees, and loses all of its lift. Then it just falls, sideways. When that happens, you're in what's called a "death spiral", because it's extremely difficult to recover from the condition, and you typically don't even know you've entered one. When you do, you as a pilot are already in a state of spatial disorientation; you *literally* don't know which way is up and which down, and since the plane is by now basically half-way inverted, with now absolutely no lift, losing altitude like a falling rock, you as the pilot have very little possibility of correcting. *Technically*, in *theory*, you often *could* recover, if you have enough altitude, speed and sturdiness of airframe; even I have run it through in a game. But in practice, recovery from a well developed death spiral is mostly beyond human ability. Especially once you lose height, because at low altitudes, already going nose down, you can't even convert high air speed/energy into a corrective manoeuvre before you hit the terrain, and there will only be seconds to lose. This is then why the pilot flying is supposed to only look at the instrumentation, and why there are auditory warnings about bank angle on the modern jets. The Swedish commercial midsize Boeing pilot, Mentour, on YouTube, is first rate in explaining all of this stuff. Okay, so, finally, how would you recover from
Re: [Sursound] [off-topic] Spirals
Bringing things round in a circle (rather than a spiral) Anyone any ideas how one could provide an audio horizon that could be a mimic of the gyro artificial horizon? That could presumably add an additional warning of unintentional spiralling, and one that would signal a discrepancy between gravitational/centrifugal pull and absolute vertical. I can see the problems of providing a height dimension with headphones, and also a question of what audio signals would have sufficient rate to provide the frequency of stimulus needed. ATC and TCAS would be some help but I think you would need rather more than just that. This is just coffee-time thoughts - I'm not planning to go flying any time soon;} Chris Woolf On 08/03/2023 13:23, t.mich...@posteo.de wrote: Hi Panos! First of all: Welcome! Second: YES you are definitely in the right place. Third: If you have any question, feel invite to ask. :-) Take care and stay healthy Cheers Thorsten Am 08.03.2023 00:08 schrieb Panos Kouvelis: I recently subscribed to this mailing list for insightful discussions on surround sound. Up 'till now, the material I have received is about aviation. Am I in the wrong place? :-) *Pan Athen* SoundFellas <https://soundfellas.com/>, *MediaFlake Ltd <http://mediaflake.com/>* Digital Media Services, Content, and Tools On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 1:03 AM Sampo Syreeni wrote: On 2023-02-22, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > And in many cases the aircraft may very well be unstable in that axis: > if left alone, the roll angle will slowly increase. Actually, most modern aircraft are stable in the bank axis as well. Part of why they have swept wings, bent wings and wingtips and the like, is to this regard. (Part of: most of it has to with approaching transonic flight. But not all.) The thing is though, and as you say below, the pilot won't feel anything weird when approaching a spiral. The built in stability of the airplane will keep everybody in their seat at 1g acceleration perpendicular to the floor, evenas the airplane banks to something approaching 90 degrees, and loses all of its lift. Then it just falls, sideways. When that happens, you're in what's called a "death spiral", because it's extremely difficult to recover from the condition, and you typically don't even know you've entered one. When you do, you as a pilot are already in a state of spatial disorientation; you *literally* don't know which way is up and which down, and since the plane is by now basically half-way inverted, with now absolutely no lift, losing altitude like a falling rock, you as the pilot have very little possibility of correcting. *Technically*, in *theory*, you often *could* recover, if you have enough altitude, speed and sturdiness of airframe; even I have run it through in a game. But in practice, recovery from a well developed death spiral is mostly beyond human ability. Especially once you lose height, because at low altitudes, already going nose down, you can't even convert high air speed/energy into a corrective manoeuvre before you hit the terrain, and there will only be seconds to lose. This is then why the pilot flying is supposed to only look at the instrumentation, and why there are auditory warnings about bank angle on the modern jets. The Swedish commercial midsize Boeing pilot, Mentour, on YouTube, is first rate in explaining all of this stuff. Okay, so, finally, how would you recover from a well developed death spiral, presuming you realized you were in one? Well, the optimum way would be to use all of the airfoils at the pilot's control at the same time to convert kinetic and potential energy of the frame into first 1) orientation, and then 2) into safe height in level flight. The optimum control trajectory going there is universally wild, so that you can't even practice for it in a simulator. It can even be chaotic, in the true mathematical sense. Many of the attempts at automated recovery I known of literally crashed on that point; you can't do optimum control here, because it leads you into an unstable calculation. Instead, you have to have your algoritm flying off the optimum path, in order to keep a stability margin. (Knowing how much off the optimum path it should be, and what a stability margin even *is*, is to date an unknown as well. It's difficult to quantify.) So, how would I fly out of a death spiral, suddenly and against expectation fully knowing I was in one? Fully knowing which way, how fast, at which height, I and my aeroplane was going? Well, obviously, I would have to regain lift, evenas I was falling. I'd use ailerons to gain "level flight" evenwhile falling. While that was done, I'd yoke up, no matter the orientation of the airframe (assuming I wasn't downright inverted), in order to gain altitude and *true* level flight. I'd put the engi
Re: [Sursound] So long CIPIC HRTF?
You add some attractive academic thought to this problem - more organised than my original poke. Can I throw in another silly thought? The "training" to cope with a modified HRTF - say, putting on a tilted wide-brimmed hat and pulling a thick scarf round one's neck - seems to take place almost instantly. As someone mentioned on this list before, this is probably because there are visual clues that allow us to re-calibrate our direction sensing, most particularly if the changes are within a range that we have often met before. That familiarity seems necessary, because I've noticed that if one of my ears is temporarily blocked for some reason, I can still make the directional re-calibration but it definitely takes longer - long enough for me to be conscious of doing it. The silly thought is, do we just need a short-term feedback correction? A brief visual cue, which can subsequently be dropped, because our neural correction system retains the re-calibration until something else occurs to convince our brain that it needs to correct again. No idea how you might experiment with that Chris Woolf On 15/02/2023 13:43, Sampo Syreeni wrote: On 2022-12-31, Chris Woolf wrote: It has always struck me that we can indeed adapt remarkably quickly to local changes in our personal HTRF, and that therefore this needs to be considered as a dynamic affair, rather than a purely static one. By the way, there are even more remarkable examples of that adaptability in psychophysics. Perhaps the most dramatic I know of is the one of inverting goggles. Apparently, if you consistently wear a headset which flips your vision upside down, in about two to three weeks your circuits adjust to compensate, and then back again once you stop the experiment. That happens even if you're an adult, so that this is not an example of early childhood, low level plasticity and the irreversibility that comes with it. (Pace kittens only shown vertical stripes and that sort of thing.) So how much precision is really needed for an HRTF? And how inaccurate can it be for our normal correction ability to deal with it? Perhaps even more to the point, what precisely are the mechanisms which enable us to compensate like that? Because if we really understood what they are, maybe we could take conscious advantage of them, to rapidly train people to work with a generalized HRTF set, instead of going the hard way of measuring or modelling individualized head, torso and pinna responses. One obvious answer is feedback. I'd argue the main reason head tracking works so well is that we're tuned to correlate how we move with the sensory input provoked by the movement. That's for instance how children appear to learn first occlusion and then by extension object constancy. In audition, I've had the pleasure of trying out a research system in which different kinds of head tracked binaural auralization methods were available for side by side comparison. The system worked surprisingly well even with no HRTF's applied, but just amplitude and delay variation against an idealized pair of point omni receivers. I also adapted to it *really* fast, like in ten minutes or so. But is there more? Head tracking, especially in a directionally solid and low latency form, isn't exactly an over the counter solution yet. So could you perhaps at least partially substitute the learning from feedback with something like synchronized visual or tactile cues, in a training session? Because if you could, you'd suddenly gain a lower cost yet at least somewhat effective version of binaural rendering; there would be money to be made. ___ 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] So long CIPIC HRTF?
Such a good point. Thank you.
I'm too rooted in the film and TV world, where a visual anchor
invariably exists.
Chris Woolf
On 01/01/2023 09:21, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote:
The problem for us with ambisonics is in most cases we do not have
any visual reference to confirm or adjust the acoustic cues to any
reference.
There exists papers showing that the we humans locks in to visual cues
and our experience and allows vision to win.
Bo-Erik
Den lör 31 dec. 2022 16:04Chris Woolf skrev:
On 30/12/2022 18:33, brian.k...@sorbonne-universite.fr wrote:
> It must be repeated that our auditory system adapts to our
own local changes, in clothing, hair style, etc. and we are not
significantly thrown off by such things (at least after adaptive
listening for a bit). ions, view archives and so on.
Great to see that mentioned.
It has always struck me that we can indeed adapt remarkably
quickly to
local changes in our personal HTRF, and that therefore this needs
to be
considered as a dynamic affair, rather than a purely static one.
If you suffer a temporarily blocked ear - after swimming, say - your
stereo perception may be bent out of accuracy for a few minutes,
but the
(extreme gain/frequency inaccuracy gets accounted for within our
brains
and we soon find visual and aural alignment back more or less
correctly.
Likewise putting on wooly hat, a coat with a thick collar, or a heavy
scarf - all objects that should wreck the accuracy of a static HTRF -
have only the most limited of effects on positional accuracy.
So how much precision is really needed for an HRTF? And how
inaccurate
can it be for our normal correction ability to deal with it?
Chris Woolf
___
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/20230101/e7c4f435/attachment.htm>
___
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] So long CIPIC HRTF?
On 30/12/2022 18:33, brian.k...@sorbonne-universite.fr wrote: It must be repeated that our auditory system adapts to our own local changes, in clothing, hair style, etc. and we are not significantly thrown off by such things (at least after adaptive listening for a bit). ions, view archives and so on. Great to see that mentioned. It has always struck me that we can indeed adapt remarkably quickly to local changes in our personal HTRF, and that therefore this needs to be considered as a dynamic affair, rather than a purely static one. If you suffer a temporarily blocked ear - after swimming, say - your stereo perception may be bent out of accuracy for a few minutes, but the (extreme gain/frequency inaccuracy gets accounted for within our brains and we soon find visual and aural alignment back more or less correctly. Likewise putting on wooly hat, a coat with a thick collar, or a heavy scarf - all objects that should wreck the accuracy of a static HTRF - have only the most limited of effects on positional accuracy. So how much precision is really needed for an HRTF? And how inaccurate can it be for our normal correction ability to deal with it? Chris Woolf ___ 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] Dave Malham
Does anyone have a current email address for Dave Malham, please? I have someone who wants to contact him about an old article in Microphone Data. Chris Woolf ___ 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] 3 point XY - Anyone ever heard about this?
Michael Williams is undoubtedly an oddity in our audio world, but he is a great experimenter and his ideas are all grounded in solid science. I've known him for a great many years and he's never come up with hogwash or snake-oil in all that time. Chris Woolf On 05/12/2022 13:50, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 07:07:08AM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: On 2022-12-04, Thorsten Michels wrote: Does anyone ever heard of a system described as "3 point XY"? Sounds like hogwash and snakeoil. It certainly is not. If the three mics are coincident (in the horizontal plane), you can combine their signals to obtain - An omni response - A front/back fig-8 - A left/right fig-8 and these three in turn can be mixed to obtain any first order mic with an horizontal axis. ___ 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] Reynolds mics
Thank you all for filling in my lack of knowledge of Jack Reynolds.
Truly, I was just asking because I had been contacted by a friend and
user of an old Soundfield about these mics, and I had to admit total
ignorance;}
Jack has been conversing with me since then off-list, and I've clearly
managed a bit of unintentional promo on his behalf! Good to hear how
many of you are using his kit and how favourable so many reactions are.
I'm not in the world of making recordings nowadays but I do feel a
little more up-to-date - such are the benefits of this list.
Chris Woolf
On 26/03/2022 11:39, Axel Drioli wrote:
Hi Chris
I've been using almost every prototype stage of Jack's mics since that
first day he showed me a 3d printed array frame.
I've used them in so many scenarios, I have 4x of them. Do you have
any specific recordings you would like to hear? I'll provide them in A
format and also upsampled AmbiX 3rd order.
Axel
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 19:09, Drew Kirkland wrote:
I have one, I can send some recordings. It is a flatter response
than the
sennheiser Ambo. It's very light and the capsules are reasonably well
matched.
I use it mostly for wild landscape receding with a mix pre10
Drew
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, 12:24 Chris Woolf,
wrote:
> A friend asked me about this mic. Have to admit I have never
heard of
> it, or of the company.
>
> Does anyone on the list have any knowledge, thoughts or comments?
>
> Chris Woolf
>
> ___
> 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/20220325/b85c491a/attachment.htm>
___
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.
--
*Axel Drioli*
/*SpatialAudioLabs.com <http://spatialaudiolabs.com/>*/
/
/
/Creating sonic immersive experiences for XR and installations./
/
/
/SoundingWild.com <http://soundingwild.com/> for Wildlife and
Conservation immersive experiences.//
/
/
/
*
*/Tel-Facetime:/*+44 7460 223640
*
*
/*E-mail: a...@spatialaudiolabs.com <mailto:a...@spatialaudiolabs.com>*/
*
/'Life On The Edge', a Sounding Wild
<http://www.soundingwild.com/> x Spatial Audio Labs production for
Wildlife Alliance <https://www.wildlifealliance.org/> is part of
*EarthXR 2020 <https://earthx.org/expo/main-attractions/earthxr/>
*official selection and Finalist at *SXSW2020 Virtual Noise Showcase*/
/
/
/
/
/
/
//
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20220326/6b846cc7/attachment.htm>
___
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] Reynolds mics
Thank you, sir, for some helpful answers. My apologies for my ignorance of your work;} I'll continue some of the conversation off list... Chris On 25/03/2022 13:17, Jack Reynolds wrote: Hi Chris, The 3D printing does have several advantages from a design point of view. I can make structures that would be impossible with traditional methods. I nickel coat the nylon SLS parts with very good shielding results. The nylon also doesn’t get as ‘cold’ as metal bodied mics so that and IP67 waterproof LEMO connectors makes them very good for outdoor use. For windshields I have custom made Rycote BBGs that sit the array at the centre of the windshield. I have some demo mics available if you want to try one out. Cheers Jack Sent from my iPhone On 25 Mar 2022, at 12:58, Chris Woolf wrote: He may well do! But I was intrigued by the use of 3D printing for what are always going to be very low sales numbers, and how efficient the electrostatic screening was likely to be. I also wondered about the pop screening efficiency too. Chris Woolf On 25/03/2022 12:55, Tim Cowlishaw wrote: I've not used the mic, but I do know Jack Reynolds who makes them, he's now working at BBC R&D in the audio dept, and he's a good guy and knows his stuff! I suspect he might also lurk on here... :-) On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 13:24, Chris Woolf wrote: A friend asked me about this mic. Have to admit I have never heard of it, or of the company. Does anyone on the list have any knowledge, thoughts or comments? Chris Woolf ___ 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/20220325/413ed843/attachment.htm> ___ 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] Reynolds mics
He may well do! But I was intrigued by the use of 3D printing for what are always going to be very low sales numbers, and how efficient the electrostatic screening was likely to be. I also wondered about the pop screening efficiency too. Chris Woolf On 25/03/2022 12:55, Tim Cowlishaw wrote: I've not used the mic, but I do know Jack Reynolds who makes them, he's now working at BBC R&D in the audio dept, and he's a good guy and knows his stuff! I suspect he might also lurk on here... :-) On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 at 13:24, Chris Woolf wrote: A friend asked me about this mic. Have to admit I have never heard of it, or of the company. Does anyone on the list have any knowledge, thoughts or comments? Chris Woolf ___ 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/20220325/413ed843/attachment.htm> ___ 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] Reynolds mics
A friend asked me about this mic. Have to admit I have never heard of it, or of the company. Does anyone on the list have any knowledge, thoughts or comments? Chris Woolf ___ 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] the facebook group
I heartily agree. Facebook is at best a terrible nuisance, and I do everything I can to avoid being mired in it. Chris Woolf On 02/01/2022 09:13, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2022 at 06:19:03AM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: Hi. How about if you all also join the Facebook-group, corresponding to this one? Because it'd be nice as always... ;) So you suggest to support a platform * that systematically amplifies division, extremism, and polarization around the world, * where you are the product to be sold, for any purpose including manipulation of elections, * is owned by a sociopath who thinks that you have no right to privacy, and has consistently lied about Facebook's policies. The sooner FB disappears the better it will be for all of us. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.
On 01/06/2019 22:25, Augustine Leudar wrote: by line of sght - I mean we do installations that have walls , dence trees and foliage , all sorts of stuff in the way - so IR , though it looks like a neat idea and I think preferable to wifi in some ways - wouldnt work for us Even wifi fails in some situations where walls are thick. Indeed not an easy task. Exploring the Shure system they would seem to deal with this sort of problem using multiple radiators - so some cabling, but much more limited than to every individual speaker. Delving into the user guide specs it doesn't appear to be compressed or hint at significant latency, and for 16 (mono) channel use (the maximum) has a bandwidth of 20-20kHz (-3dB) and 80dB dynamic range. Of course, I have just invented an ultra-broadband distribution system that uses quantum vacuum effects to communicate between atmospheric nitrogen atoms - just needs a few million dollars (payable directly to me) to commercialise the concept;} Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.
On 31/05/2019 20:57, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: https://fmarques.org/ronja-diy-optical-data/ If you want to diy instead of buying, seems like a complete design. Optical distribution of data/digital sound. Thanks for the link, and the research. While line-of-sight is a limitation I have been impressed by how well conference translation systems using IR headphones have worked in practice, and can imagine that a little planning and elevation could overcome this issue. I'm deeply ~unimpressed~ by how poor 5GHz Wi-Fi signals are at penetrating solid walls and diffracting or reflecting round objects. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.
On 28/05/2019 13:34, David Pickett wrote: ... I tell myself that it should not be too difficult to make decent hi-res transmit and receive modules. I could use these for links from spot mikes in concerts where these have to pass the audience to get to the recorder, and also between my monitor output and the four speakers I use. Getting rid of cables from the ground would be terrific in both situations; but I am not prepared to accept any degradation of the signal, particularly not any modification of the dynamic range. Has anyone looked into IR distribution systems? I know Shure has one that is multichannel capable, and as far as I can see can handle full bandwidth (uncompressed) audio. Being able to avoid the crowded RF spectrum allows considerably greater freedom. The only spec I can find doesn't mention dynamic range or latency but there's no reason to suppose that either are compromised. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)
On 30/05/2019 17:51, mgraves mstvp.com wrote: The RF issue of range, carrier frequency, channel width is quite separate from the deliverable audio path. The Opus audio codec has revolutionized audio coding. It's able to deliver full-bandwidth audio at bitrates not much more than what was once typical of a telephone call. This means that the RF band need not be large to deliver high quality audio over a digital link. This answer is quite revealing of the different approaches and requirements within our audio field. My background is broadcast audio, so for origination purposes any digital coding has to be lossless, and latency has to be ~very~ low. Lossy coding is fine as a delivery format (and so would be OK for speaker feeds) but if the sound has to be processed en route the psychoacoustic stuff doesn't stand up. Likewise latency of 5-10ms can begin to alter performance, depending upon how the foldback is returned to an artist. I don't know Opus but having read up its spec (on Wikipedia) it is lossy and so can only be used as a delivery format. I had to smile at 30ms latency being reported as adequate for musicians to feel "in-time" - not for the ones I've ever worked with. Likewise the suggestion that 45-100ms is acceptable for lipsync is laughable - that's up to 5 TV frames adrift. Maybe audiences have become inured to low quality standards. Latency for "live interaction" at each end of a phone line, and face-to-face a few feet apart in a room require very different standards - Opus's suggestion of 150ms for VOIP might just be acceptable for the first, but it would destroy the second application. I don't doubt that it is a clever and well-designed codec, and that it is extremely useful, but one must keep in mind what it ~actually~ is rather than what it sounds like. Opus doesn't deliver full bandwidth audio, any more than other digitally compressed systems do. It delivers something that convinces most ears that it is a full bandwidth, full dynamic range signal, but it must always be remembered what is missing. If you used such a system to deliver sound to speakers (assuming there is a technique for maintaining multichannel phase coherence) it should work perfectly well. If you used it for passing the output channels of a microphone I doubt you would not remain happy for long. Which also means that the statement "the RF issue of range, carrier frequency, channel width is quite separate from the deliverable audio path" must be very carefully qualified - it is only correct in very specific circumstances. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)
Answering this specific question... On 30/05/2019 10:42, Augustine Leudar wrote: ... I had some walkie talkies that had a range of one KM with admitedly terrible audio (surely this could be improved) . Whereas Senheiser in ear monitors have a really short distance range of around 40 metres and use much higher electromagnetic frequencies ((863 mhz) . Why is it something cant be done with the same sort of range as the walkie talkies but for.multichammel audio (according to wikipedia 30 - 400 mhz) ? Walkie talkies run on a 12.5kHz narrow band, and need ~50kHz of channel space. Broadcast quality FM (as in radio mics) uses a channel space of ~250kHz. Given than channel "skirts" are quite a bit wider multiple local channels cannot sit close to each other, and are commonly spaced ~500kHz apart. They also have to avoid numerical frequencies which would cause intermodulation. Thus remarkably few analogue radio channels can fit into a single (8MHz) TV channel space. The usual answer is ~12 at best. Some claim more but range and mutual interference may suffer. With digital modulation this can improve to ~20 because the effects of interference are reduced. Range is directly related to bandwidth, transmission power, and RF signal-to-noise limitations of the receiver. Narrow band with limited audio bandwidth and restricted (audio) signal-to-noise is a much easier task with a couple of AA cells than 20kHz audio with 100dB (companded) dynamic range. Digital radio mics have been even harder to make that can modulate something that equates to full broadcast bandwidth and dynamic range into the the same 250kHz bandwidth as analogue, and with roughly the same range/battery power. I've no idea what the .multichannel audio is - can you elaborate? And I can't imaging that there is any spectrum clear in the 30-400MHz region. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)
On 28/05/2019 19:47, Marc Lavallée wrote: Le 28/05/2019 à 13:48, mgraves mstvp.com a écrit : The latency is not only caused by the packetization; the transmission chain looks like: (microphone -> ADC -> encoding -> BT transmission) -> (BT reception -> decoding) -> (SIP + encoding -> IP transmission) -> (IP reception -> SIP + decoding) -> (DAC -> loudspeaker) True enough, but the ADC, encoding, decoding and DAC elements can be reduced to <3ms (as happens with some of the best recent digital radio mics), which does indeed indicate that the intermediate stages are the ones that really do the harm. A while back I had to make a short range speech reinforcer for a friend with a damaged larynx. It had to use an analogue pathway because no (affordable at the time) digital path had anything like low enough latency to permit normal, unstilted conversation. A target figure ~has~ to be <10ms to avoid disturbing speech, and for most people/environments must be <<5ms. I find it laughable that "low latency" frequently seems to mean 30-50ms. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Soundfield by Rode plugin
On 17/12/2018 10:10, David Pickett wrote: A "time-frequency adaptive approach" What? Unless it works spectacularly well, I would suspect the application of snake oil. If this is a 3D version of the sort of technique used to improve the directivity of an axial mic then it can sound pretty good. The Schoeps SuperCMIT produces excellent sound quality with gentle processing help, and only starts to show faint artefacts when things are pushed very hard indeed. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Soundfield by Rode plugin
On 17/12/2018 09:39, Dave Hunt wrote: How might they phase/time align the capsules ?? This must indeed be highly complex, as it is frequency dependent (low frequencies have smaller phase differences than high frequencies) as well as source directionally (across multiple blind sources) dependent. Surely this is just multiple beam-forming - taking the different signal levels of single events at each capsule and correcting them in the time domain to be aligned as closely as possible. Yes, that's frequency dependent so has to be done narrow band, but can be done for multiple events, a multiple number of times. This seems to be an approach that's been used by at least two mic manufacturers that I know of (Audio Technica and Schoeps) to improve directivity of axial mics. With increasing processing power the ability to generate more simultaneous beams allows this to be done for multiple directions. The ones that I know use this technique use flat arrays and limit the beams to a 180° arc, but I don't see any reason not to extend the technique to 360° or a full orb. I should state that this is entirely supposition - I have no actual knowledge of doing this. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Zoom H3-VR
On 15/09/2018 16:12, hacklava wrote: On Sat, 15 Sep 2018 14:52:03 +0100 Chris Woolf wrote: How open these sort of products can be in terms of internal architecture and calibration is another (commercial) problem. At least some secrecy is essential to their business model, to avoid making reverse engineering too easy... and therefore losing the mass market that their product has to be based on. I read your "it's the economy, stupid" argument. Now there's a market. Hallelujah. Consumers of the world, praise secrecy. Put it this way; I understand how the audio market works, having been a designer for bits of it over the decades. Personally I love the artisan aspect, but I have to accept that patents and keeping some things hidden has been what has paid my for my bread crusts over the years. My point is that all the hardware is available to build an Ambisonics microphone, But selling you 4 matched capsules as an individual, and selling them as part of a finished ambisonics recorder, is a very different commercial matter. ... There's probably more plastic than anything else in this microphone. Oh, don't dismiss plastic! It can be a far better material than metal, used in the right place. Nor is it cheap to design and tool - it is just cheap as a part, when you make 100,000. I have countless arguments about the use of foam i n windshields, which people assume must be cheap because they see something like it in packaging. They never realise how hard it is to engineer on a 3-axis high speed CNC. Like sound, reality have directional components; we're in 2018, not in 1980, and there's alternatives. There are Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Zoom H3-VR
Marc L said: What I'm still waiting for is a free (as in speech) Ambisonics microphone like the ones being developed by the SpHEAR project: https://cm-gitlab.stanford.edu/ambisonics/SpHEAR/ I want something affordable, that I can build, fix and calibrate myself, without two PhDs and access to a nuclear-powered anechoic chamber. I want a modest gear and enough knowledge Marc The great problem, of course, is that these things are only "affordable" if they can be mass-produced and sold in the tens of thousands. In DIY quantities for enthusiasts they may be excellent in quality, but they really cannot be inexpensive. For low cost the Zooms and the Rode's are the only plausible future, because they can amortise their enormous research, set-up and machining costs over sufficient numbers. The interesting point is that the sort of accuracy and tolerance feasible during their style of mass-production is beginning to equate to that of the specialists of bygone years. How open these sort of products can be in terms of internal architecture and calibration is another (commercial) problem. At least some secrecy is essential to their business model, to avoid making reverse engineering too easy... and therefore losing the mass market that their product has to be based on. None of this appeals to the artisan in most of us, but the reality of it cannot be ignored either. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] MEMS SNR Specifications
I think there is indeed some confusion in this discussion between the signal-to-noise ratio of these mics, and dynamic range. The first is conventionally related to 1Pa/94dB SPL, and one then needs to add in a Max SPL figure to get the dynamic range. We need both bits of information to understand the practicality of any mic. A noise floor of 24dBA (related to 1Pa) is about par for a small personal electret mic. A dynamic range of >115dB is what one would wish for in decent professional mics - that would be a noise floor of 15dBA and a max SPL of >130dB (with a distortion figure of 3 or 5%). Chris Woolf (ex editor of Microphone Data) On 18/08/2018 08:41, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: According to the document linked to below that relates self noise values to real world applications 110 SNR cannot be related to the commonly used reference sound level. 110 dBA SNR would be 16 dB below absolute quiet. If the value 70dBA that I found for the infineon dual membrane MEMS mic is related to 1 Pascal, then it's self noise is around 24 dB which is not strictly studio quality. But not really horrible. If it is related to max 10% distortion which is at 135 dBA thats not a realistic comparison value as the result is a self noise of 65 dBA. That would be a noise source not a microphone :-) ! So a bit of apples and oranges comparison is going on 😎 http://www.neumann.com/homestudio/en/what-is-self-noise-or-equivalent-noise-level SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO Another way to document the noise performance is to specify the signal-to-noise ratio. But relative to what signal? The reference sound pressure level for noise measurements is 94 dB (which equals a sound pressure of 1 pascal). So you can simply calculate: Signal-to-noise (db-A) = 94 dB – self-noise (dB-A) The actual signal-to-noise ratio in use, of course, depends on the sound pressure level of your sound source. Bo-Erik On Sat, 18 Aug 2018 01:37 Jack Reynolds, wrote: Are you sure the Ambeo has 110dB SNR? Sent from my iPhone On 17 Aug 2018, at 23:56, Paul Hodges wrote: --On 17 August 2018 14:55 -0700 Ralph Jones wrote: Some folks posting here have seemed to suggest that this level of noise might possibly be acceptable. Well, firstly we don't know the actual specification of the devices used by Zylia. And secondly, using an array of nineteen to generate an output gives the possibility of significant improvement, because the sound source signals are correlated and the noise is uncorrelated. How this holds up in practice at higher orders and higher frequencies I will attempt to judge when I get my hands on the ZM-1 rather than just predicting failure in advance (which is not consistent with the reviews I've seen heard and read). Paul -- Paul Hodges ___ 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. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20180818/40e5ff31/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. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Looking for mic advice
On 11/08/2018 18:16, jack reynolds wrote: I use 14mm electrets, so you can still get them pretty close together. They naturally have a lower noise floor and wide dynamic range. Thanks for the clarification - I'd only seen your large diaphragm mics. 14mm capsules sounds fine. Chris Woolf Jack On 11 August 2018 at 14:42, Chris Woolf wrote: On 11/08/2018 10:59, Axel Drioli wrote: ... I use a prototype made by Reynolds Microphones. ... This mic has much lower self-noise than any other ambi mic you find around. But is that done using large diaphragm capsules? With the inevitable consequences in terms of coincidence? Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Looking for mic advice
On 11/08/2018 10:59, Axel Drioli wrote: ... I use a prototype made by Reynolds Microphones. ... This mic has much lower self-noise than any other ambi mic you find around. But is that done using large diaphragm capsules? With the inevitable consequences in terms of coincidence? Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Looking for mic advice
When I reviewed the Sennheiser Ambeo some while ago I was distinctly underwhelmed by many aspects of it. A shame, but I got the feeling it wasn't something that the company felt any deep interest in. Røde did indeed buy the Soundfield company, but perhaps more importantly bought Pieter Shillebeeckx and have given him freedom and budget to develop stuff. I suspect the NT-SF1 will be a lot more intersting as well as inexpensive. Chris Woolf On 10/08/2018 19:37, Søren Bendixen wrote: Hi I´m in the same situation, want to record nature (and other things) in ambisonics. and I have no experience - and waiting for the new Røde(Rode) NT- SF1 - I will be just below 1000 USD Røde took over Soundfield and then bought some knowledge about Ambisonics equipment and this microphone would be the result ... In Denmark, for example, Sennheiser ambeo costs around 1900 usd They announced the NT - SF1 almost 6 months ago - so.. BR Søren Bendixen Den 10. aug. 2018 kl. 20.22 skrev Drew Kirkland : Hi guys We have recently decided to record nature in ambisonic format with a additional specific mono and stereo recordings added in at edit stage. I would be interested in current ambisonic mic choice, we don't have loads of cash but want to get as transparent a sound field as possible. We have all had experience over the last 30 years or so of using standard mics and have our favourites for particular situations but have never had experience of usi g ambisonic mics and relevant field recorders. Advice welcome Drew Drew Kirkland 1 campbleton cottage Hunterston Estate KA23 9QF 07876238608 -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20180810/3ceb1f7b/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. Med venlig hilsen/Best regards Søren Bendixen Composer/Sound Designer/Producer Company: Audiotect New Exhibition sound design " På Djengis Khans stepper - Mongoliets Nomader", - Moesgaard Museum, 19 june 2018 - 7 april 2019 - National Museum of Denmark: From june 2019 Jyllandsposten: 5 (out of 6) Stars: “The illusion of a railroad journey is underpinned by the sceneries that stand outside the windows. Sound and image are in exemplary harmony, which is just as consistent completed when you attend the exhibition. the room is generally enhanced by a rather fascinating sound design” (22 juni 2018) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20180810/8f5743a1/attachment.html> -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IMG_4363.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20401 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20180810/8f5743a1/attachment.jpeg> ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Multi-channel Dante Mic Pre?
Grace Design M108 with a Dante card? Not cheap but mic amps that behave very nicely. Chris Woolf On 09/08/2018 14:45, Len Moskowitz wrote: Does anyone know of an 8 (or more than 8) channel mic pre that operates over Dante networks? All leads appreciated! Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com) Core Sound LLC www.core-sound.com Home of TetraMic and OctoMic ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Rode Soundfield NT-SF1
I'd be very interested to know the argument behind that. Although bass response is affected by size in speakers I don't know of any reason for that in microphones. Chris Woolf On 13/04/2018 18:58, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: On 04/13/2018 10:23 AM, Jack Reynolds wrote: That’s what I thought. I have also heard that a radius smaller than 15mm or so has detrimental effects on the low end The is probably related to the size of the capsules. As you bring the radius down you have to use smaller capsules and the low frequency response will suffer (for example, I can see a big difference in low end response between microphones I have built using 10mm capsules - array radius of 9.2mm - vs. 14mm capsules - array radius 11mm, but that is because of the capsules themselves). -- Fernando ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Rode Soundfield NT-SF1
On 11/04/2018 18:40, Paul Hodges wrote: ... I wonder how the capsules will compare with those on the SPS-200, given that the projected cost is a mere fraction of that (if the price quoted in the video is in Australian dollars, then it's only a quarter of the price of the SPS-200!). While I have been sceptical in the past about Rode products I have to admit that many of their more recent ones have been remarkably good for the price. The company's willingness to commit to a lot of capital expenditure in automating manufacture, on the presumption of being able to sell high volumes, has made low cost manufacture possible. They seem able to compete with Far East pricing, yet maintain Western engineering values - a scary feat. They've also bought Peter Schillebeeckx with the Soundfield remnants, so they do have some proper expertise too. Only time will tell if the product really works, but it can't be dismissed out of hand now. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Rode VideoMic SoundField
Well there may be a few problems to solve before this can become a commercial product. Peiter has only been with Rode for a short while so the development of the array and processing card is probably not complete yet. I'll predict that the handling and windnoise of the array won't be too brilliant with the set-up as shown, and may need some further improvement. And getting the channel gains right with a calibration routine that fits in with the Rode factory production system could need some original thought. I suspect it ~will~ appear as a product - there's likely to be a good market - but it make take a few more months. Chris Woolf On 21/01/2017 07:49, Bob Burton wrote: The introduction was done at a press event at NAMM. Yet neither Rode nor Freedman exhibited at NAMM. Curious. On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 8:16 PM, Gary Gallagher wrote: The propaganda video https://youtu.be/SQm0U_Mtweo Gary -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/ attachments/20170121/096931a5/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] External phantom battery source for TetraMic PPAc
Excellent points - thank you. Chris Woolf On 24-Jul-16 12:54, Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 10:49:47AM +0100, Chris wrote: But does that mean that the impedance converters of the capsules are running on the 9V supply? If so, does the max SPL suffer, as it does on most microphones running off reduced supplies? On P48 I'm guessing the Class A stages run from ~30V rails. Capsule sensitivity is 7 mV / Pa. At 135 dB SPL output will be close to 0 dBu, which should be OK for a 9V supply. Ciao, --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] External phantom battery source for TetraMic PPAc
Useful comments, Richard. Thank you. But does that mean that the impedance converters of the capsules are running on the 9V supply? If so, does the max SPL suffer, as it does on most microphones running off reduced supplies? On P48 I'm guessing the Class A stages run from ~30V rails. Chris Woolf On 24-Jul-16 06:31, Richard Lee wrote: The Tetramic spec declares 3.5mA x 4 capsules (=15mA) @48V - that's 720mW But to power through the PPac it's 9-12V @<10mA - that's 90- 120mW - a big difference. The P48V current consumption is pessimistic. Powering directly bypasses the regulation required for P48V. You also avoid noisy P48V in some (many?) prosumer recorders though PPAc is pretty immune to this. It was designed with wall plug adaptors in mind but do check out the one you want to use. I use an alkaline PP3 rubber banded to the PPAc. Make sure you have the correct connector. For an important recording, use a new ALKALINE PP3. Probably 10 hrs life http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/522.pdf I regard batteries as consumables and the cost is trivial. I do stage sound and find it easier to use new batteries than to try & ensure 24 batteries for 12 radio mikes are all fully charged. A bag of PP3s costs less and will weigh less than chargers etc But really anything which will supply 9-12VDC will do. I've suggested to Len we sell a deluxe PP3 connector with O2-free Cu, insulated with the scrotums of Cooktown kangaroos, all hand carved from solid Unobtainium by Virgins .. shut up Lee ... just SHUT UP! ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] External phantom battery source for TetraMic PPAc
On 23-Jul-16 14:29, David Pickett wrote:
Core Sound says: "When 48 Volt phantom power is not available, PPAc
can also be powered by an external battery pack or AC power supply
("wall wart") via a DC power connector (1.7mm) on the PPAc
transmitter. It requires 9 to 12 Volts DC at 10 mA minimum."
More to the point, what is the MAXIMUM current required?
I scratched my head on that one too. The Tetramic spec declares 3.5mA x
4 capsules (=15mA) @48V - that's 720mW
But to power through the PPac it's 9-12V @<10mA - that's 90- 120mW - a
big difference.
Perhaps Mr Moskowitz can translate for us;}
Chris Woolf
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
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] External phantom battery source for TetraMic PPAc
You could, presumably, tackle this from two directions. You could use one of the many 9 /12V Li+ powerpacks sold for running video camera accessories (see Amazon etc) which should be able to provide you with 50 hours or so of phantom running on the PPac. Or, if you hate DC coaxial connectors as much as I do... You could run your recorder off a similar (but maybe more professionally connectored) supply, and still use the recorder as the P48 supply. It does slightly depend on what you are recording on, of course. Chris Woolf On 23-Jul-16 03:12, Halasz, Andrew wrote: Is anyone using an external battery pack to power the TetraMic via the DC connector on the PPAc transmitter? This is referenced on the Core Sound website. Is there any thing available that suits this purpose? Running phantom power on my portable recorder to the four mics goes through batteries insatiably. I'm looking for an alternative phantom power source. andrew halasz -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160723/b5979beb/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. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] YouTube now supports Ambisonics (warning....part advertisement..)
DTS-X is based upon an open object codec that SRS labs developed and open sourced, the decoder is a proprietary implementation but anyone can make their own decoder. DTS acquired SRS labs to get the technology, it is superior to Dolby Atmos and is scale-able from bin-aural headphones all the way to 64 channels. Even Dialog can be a separate object, so you can turn up dialog, but not the rest of center channel info, or even have a left and right center channel so when 2 people are on screen their voices come from their side of the screen! All of this with no changes to the mix just like Ambisonics, speaker layout is configurable in the decoder. Has anyone here tried converting B-format to DTS-X or Dolby Atmos? Also all a/d converters are essential DSD bit-stream with decimation filters added on to produce PCM. I much prefer the sound of DSD recorded, processed and mixed in DSD, without any PCM conversion. It simply sounds better than any PCM I have heard. I would be curios to hear b-format done entirely in DSD. Thanks in advance. Chris Boozer On Thursday, April 21, 2016 9:45 AM, Aaron Heller wrote: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:14 AM, Trond Lossius wrote: > > On 20 Apr 2016, at 21:16, Marc Lavallee wrote: > > > > I wonder why using uncompressed PCM instead of compressed AAC... > > Is there a risk of compressed audio altering the phase between the > channels, affecting the spatial image? > Marc and I looked at this informally when he was developing ambisonic.xyz. We took panned first-order B-format (e.g., AJH-eight-positions.amb), though an encode/decode cycle with candidate codecs, and then looked at the spatial spreading of energy with a simple parametric decoder. No listening tests, just visual comparison of plots of spatial energy. We found very little spreading with low-complexity AAC, but a fair amount with HE-AAC. Aaron Heller (hel...@ai.sri.com) Menlo Park, CA US -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160421/84c6ed60/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. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160421/1645add2/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] Are mems a good choice for ambisonic microphones?
> Btw, good to see you guys at Mikroforum the other week! Doh! I should have worn dark glasses;} Chris On 14-Apr-16 13:02, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/14/2016 01:09 PM, Chris wrote: And there's quite a lot more useful and well described material here too. http://www.edn.com/Pdf/ViewPdf?contentItemId=4429422 While it talks about MEMs mics, much of that applies to any very small mic, and the problems of protecting the diaphragm from, yet interfacing it to, the outside world. Chris Woolf Hi Chris, excellent link, thanks! That explains it :) Btw, good to see you guys at Mikroforum the other week! All best, Jörn On 14-Apr-16 11:04, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/13/2016 04:25 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote: I'm looking at this product here: http://www.invensense.com/products/analog/ics-40300-3/ Thanks for posting it, that's the first time I see actual plots of a MEMS microphone. Can anyone explain the reason for the horrible peak at 15k? Is is possible to linearize it to get a useful response above 10k, or does it come with extreme ringing that would make it unusable? Always good to learn about up and coming new technologies, but for this one I'm dusting off and waxing my ten-foot pole... --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Are mems a good choice for ambisonic microphones?
The plot is very similar to the ST Microelectronics one described in www.st.com/st-web-ui/static/active/en/resource/.../DM00103199.pdf That puts the peak down to Helmholtz resonance in the chamber air cavity. Chris Woolf On 14-Apr-16 11:04, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/13/2016 04:25 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote: I'm looking at this product here: http://www.invensense.com/products/analog/ics-40300-3/ Thanks for posting it, that's the first time I see actual plots of a MEMS microphone. Can anyone explain the reason for the horrible peak at 15k? Is is possible to linearize it to get a useful response above 10k, or does it come with extreme ringing that would make it unusable? Always good to learn about up and coming new technologies, but for this one I'm dusting off and waxing my ten-foot pole... --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160414/465003b6/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] Are mems a good choice for ambisonic microphones?
And there's quite a lot more useful and well described material here too. http://www.edn.com/Pdf/ViewPdf?contentItemId=4429422 While it talks about MEMs mics, much of that applies to any very small mic, and the problems of protecting the diaphragm from, yet interfacing it to, the outside world. Chris Woolf On 14-Apr-16 11:04, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: On 04/13/2016 04:25 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote: I'm looking at this product here: http://www.invensense.com/products/analog/ics-40300-3/ Thanks for posting it, that's the first time I see actual plots of a MEMS microphone. Can anyone explain the reason for the horrible peak at 15k? Is is possible to linearize it to get a useful response above 10k, or does it come with extreme ringing that would make it unusable? Always good to learn about up and coming new technologies, but for this one I'm dusting off and waxing my ten-foot pole... --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Bela embedded audio platform
Hi Sursound! I thought I would share our lab's latest embedded DSP project that might be of interest to a lot of people on this list. We've made a new high-performance embedded platform called Bela (http://bela.io) which is designed for creating digital musical instruments and interactive audio systems. We've been developing this for the past two years, and just today we launched it on Kickstarter: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/423153472/bela-an-embedded-platform-for-low-latency-interact The most important unique feature of Bela is that it has extremely low latency of less than 1 millisecond between action and sound, which is a lot faster than anything else out there. There are also some useful features for profiling sensors and a built-in browser-based development environment. Basically it is the platform I have always wanted for my own audio projects and instrument building, and now we're excited to be launching it to a broader community of musicians and engineers. If you have a moment, it would be great if you can help spread the word! The project is open-source hardware and software, and the campaign is run through the university. This email is not intended as a sales pitch -- our goal is to build awareness, so if you know anyone who you think might be interested please pass it along. You can find more info and social media links below. Thanks a lot! Best wishes, Chris Bela tech details: Bela is an open-source platform for high-performance, ultra-low-latency audio and sensor processing. It provides stereo audio in and out, onboard speaker amplifiers, 8 16-bit analog inputs and outputs, and 16 digital I/Os, all in a small self-contained package. Bela is based on the BeagleBone Black single-board computer which features a 1GHz ARM processor running Linux. Bela runs a custom audio environment which is capable of extremely small audio buffer sizes down to 2 samples, producing latency under 1 millisecond. All the analog inputs and outputs are sampled automatically at audio rates, providing precise time alignment between sensors and audio. It features an on-board, browser-based IDE including an in-browser oscilloscope. It can be programmed in C++, or Pd patches can be compiled for the board using the Heavy Audio Tools from Enzien Audio. The result is musical instruments which are faster to develop and more responsive to use. Bela was developed in the Augmented Instruments Laboratory, a team of 8 people which is part of the Centre for Digital Music at Queen Mary University of London. The Kickstarter campaign, which runs through 1 April, supports the production of the hardware. A variety of boards and kits are available with prices starting at £45, and the software and designs are already free to download. More info: http://bela.io http://twitter.com/BelaPlatform https://www.facebook.com/belaPlatform/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160229/eecabb7e/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] Wireless Solutions for Binaural Event
Thanks for all the thoughts guys - i'm going to go back through the thread and do some further research on all the suggestions :) Best Chris On 22 February 2016 at 08:52, Dave Malham wrote: > Hi, > More thoughts - if you are only concerned with all the players starting > at the same point and can tolerate a small amount of error at the end > points (would have to be checked but should be of the order of no more than > a second or two at the end of half an hour), then I would go down the > smartphone route. Avoids a lot of problems with rf signals. Again, the guys > at Hannah Bruce and Company have done something like it - see > http://www.hannahbruce.org/tlott-app.html Note that I am connected with > them so am not totally unbiased - tho' I did not do any of the work on that > project. > > Dave > > > On 21 February 2016 at 13:59, Dave Malham wrote: > > > Thinking a bit more about this, the Raspberry Pi solution may not, in > this > > case, be the right one because of power consumption/battery life > > considerations, though new "Zero" version may be better in this respect > - I > > can't find data on this yet, unfortunately. > > > > > > The FM solution with distributed antennas should also work though > > licensing would need checking against local regs. > > > >Dave > > > > > > On 21 February 2016 at 09:37, Dave Malham > wrote: > > > >> Yep, I'm definitely inclined to think that wireless is not the way to go > >> because of the walls. I'm sure you could work something up with a > Rasberry > >> Pi as a player with an rf trigger signal to start playing - or even a > >> modified mp3 player. If they were all identical (mp3 or Pi player) the > xtal > >> clocks should easily keep playback within less than a second at the end > of > >> 30 minutes, something that might be problematic with playback off mobile > >> phones which is another alternative. Note that we've done something > similar > >> at Hoxton Hall using BLE beacons to lock playback to place rather than > time > >> (http://www.hannahbruce.org/small-choices.html) > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> On 21 February 2016 at 09:23, Augustine Leudar < > augustineleu...@gmail.com > >> > wrote: > >> > >>> thinking about it you'll be lucky to get through thick medieval prison > >>> walls with anything without expensive booster units etc. Your best be > >>> might > >>> be a bit of fun - make it a bit theatrical and at the begining get > >>> everyone > >>> to press "play" on their mp3 player at exactly the same time - not the > >>> most > >>> elegant solution - but possibly the best ! Otherwise try the > Seinheizers > >>> or > >>> get the licence for a local fm frequency and hire a transmitter > >>> > >>> On 21 February 2016 at 09:11, Augustine Leudar < > >>> augustineleu...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Seinheizer in ear monitor units are about the best. Youd need to test > >>> one > >>> > pair first though with walls etc > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > On 21 February 2016 at 07:32, Bo-Erik Sandholm > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Maybe a FM receiver on the earphones and one or more low power FM > >>> >> transmitters? Or maybe > >>> >> Just search for FM transmitter with google. > >>> >> You could use several on same frequency maybe, or just connect > several > >>> >> external antennas antennas to the device. > >>> >> > >>> >> Solution depends on your prison :-) > >>> >> > >>> >> BR Bo-Erik > >>> >> On 21 Feb 2016 03:32, "Chris Timpson" > wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >> > Hi all > >>> >> > > >>> >> > Wondering if anyone has suggestions for a wireless headphone > >>> solution? > >>> >> I'm > >>> >> > working on a live event that will be a 30mins binaural sound > >>> experience > >>> >> in > >>> >> > a medieval prison for 24 audience members at a time. We need the > >>> audio > >>> >> to > >>> >> > begin simultaneously for all audience members and they wi
[Sursound] Wireless Solutions for Binaural Event
Hi all Wondering if anyone has suggestions for a wireless headphone solution? I'm working on a live event that will be a 30mins binaural sound experience in a medieval prison for 24 audience members at a time. We need the audio to begin simultaneously for all audience members and they will be walking around between 3 locations. The distances aren't huge but quite a few walls etc. I've been looking at silent disco type headphones but have concerns about the quality and also that the signal apparently is converted to mono then back to stereo during RF transmission. Anyone tested these? It could be that we use wired headphones with some kind of small playback device that can somehow be remotely triggered to play. There will just be a single audio file that plays from start to finish. Wondering if anyone has tried to build something similar, or perhaps theres an existing solution i've completely overlooked !? Many thanks, Chris Chris Timpson *Director* EarFilms T: +44 (0)7888 695770 E: ch...@earfilms.com www.earfilms.com -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160220/4b8ebefc/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] Soundfield ST350
Apologies - that email got truncated... Try again. On 09-Feb-16 16:29, Chris wrote: On 09-Feb-16 01:52, Steven Boardman wrote: Thanks John. Yes it is at a ridiculous price, ... This from the depths of Stroud The base bar, "filler strip" and underneath gubbins is all standard 140mm "stereo" windshield stuff. The lyres are also standard ones used for the so-called Softie Mount - with dovetail receptacles rather than integral clips. The pricey bit is the circular clamp which fits between the lyres. This is made specifically for TSL (Soundfield). It is actually an SLA (a version of particularly robust 3D printing) and is the only conceivable way one could produce such a component for the minimal quantity ever likely to be sold. The SLAs have to be hand-finished - the dovetails muct fit precisely, with no risk of rattle - and the clamp screw has to be threaed in. None of that comes cheaply in the one-off world. This is the pain of extreme short-run engineering. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Soundfield ST350
On 09-Feb-16 01:52, Steven Boardman wrote: Thanks John. Yes it is at a ridiculous price, ... This from the depths of Stroud The base bar, "filler strip" and underneath gubbins is all standard 140mm "stereo" windshield stuff. The lyres are also standard ones used for the so-called Softie Mount - with dovetail receptacles rather than integral clips. The pricey bit is the circular clamp which fits between the lyres. This is made specifically for TSL (Soundfield). It is actually an SLA (a version of particularly robust 3D printing) and is the only conceivable way one could produce such a component for the minimal quantity ever likely to be sold. The SLAs This is the pain of extreme short-run engineering. Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Soundfield ST350
I can't reply for Rycote officially, because I only design stuff for them - I don't have any input in terms of sales or OEM deals with Soundfield... In the bad old days I think some clips were made to allow the enormously fat body of a ST350/450 to be slung inside the "stereo" (150mm) windshield on sturdy o-rings. Very few Soundfields were used in that way and I don't think more than a handful of rigs were sold. With the advent of of "lyre" mounts it has been entirely uneconomical to tool up for old-style windshield versions that would sell less than 100 in their lifetime. But the USM mount, that was designed for chunky, side-address studio mics, can support the Soundfields very well. The only down side is that the these are meant for use on stands, and have no method of fixing a windshield to them. I suspect that is why you haven't been getting sensible answers from the distributors, who are somewhat foggy about such rare microphones. If you have an old stereo windshield you might be able to perform a little butchery to make a USM fit - it isn't impossible. But Rycote wouldn't recommend that sort of one-off work officially. Rycote will always provide alternative lyres if you are unsure what version you need - they are pretty good that way. Chris Woolf On 08-Feb-16 13:03, Steven Boardman wrote: Anyone know what compatible Rycote parts can be used with a Soundfield ST350 / ST450. I have quite a few Rycote sets and am reluctant to purchase another full set from soundfield. They and their distributors have been less than help full in telling me what parts are the same. (they use different part numbers than Rycote). Rycote also can't tell me, as they only make them for soundfield, and say I need to contact them! Best Steve -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160208/224b8ccd/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. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?
"I would like to (shamelessly) promote two studies... Nothing shameful about answering a question very usefully! Thank you. Chris Woolf On 25-Jan-16 16:45, Brian FG Katz wrote: Dear list, On the topic of creating a reduced set of HRTFs from a large database and on learning non-individual HRTFs, I would like to (shamelessly) promote two studies we carried out a few years ago looking at exactly these questions: B. Katz and G. Parseihian, “Perceptually based head-related transfer function database optimization,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 131, no. 2, pp. EL99–EL105, 2012, doi:10.1121/1.3672641. (free on-line) G. Parseihian and B. Katz, “Rapid head-related transfer function adaptation using a virtual auditory environment,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., vol. 131, no. 4, pp. 2948–2957, 2012, doi:10.1121/1.3687448. I can also point you towards a recent direction of interest with regards to HRTF ratings. I think experiment, in addition to the 7 from the above study and some other HRTFs, there were also 2 HRTF pairs of the same people, measured several years apart. The similarity of the ratings of these HRTFs gives some insight, and we are currently extending this study on general repeatability of HRTF perceptual ratings. A. Andreopoulou and B. F. G. Katz, “On the use of subjective HRTF evaluations for creating global perceptual similarity metrics of assessors and assessees,” in 21st International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD), pp. 13–20, 2015, http://hdl.handle.net/1853/54095. Best regards, -Brian FG Katz -- Brian FG Katz, Ph.D, HDR Research Director, Resp. Groupe Audio & Acoustique LIMSI, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay Rue John von Neumann Campus Universitaire d'Orsay, Bât 508 91405 Orsay cedex France Phone. + 33 (0)1 69 85 80 67 - Fax. + 33 (0)1 69 85 80 88 http://www.limsi.frweb_group: https://www.limsi.fr/fr/recherche/aa web_theme: http://www.limsi.fr/Scientifique/aa/thmsonesp/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 3877 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160125/b111cdc6/attachment.p7s> ___ 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 checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?
Maybe a silly question... But how much work has been done on the self-consistency of HRTFs? I'm aware that ear-wax, colds, which way round I sleep, etc can affect the level and HF response of one ear to another. And clothing, haircuts etc must significantly change the acoustic signal round our heads. So are measured HRTFs consistent over time? Or do we re-calibrate ourselves on a continuous basis? If the latter is true, then I can see that a generic HRTF could work if we were given some method (and time for) calibration. Chris Woolf On 25-Jan-16 11:45, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: Just a short note, my wish list for what I think. could be a good way of doing binaural coding is to use these parameters: - the distance between the ears (head size) is the most import factor so maybe 5 sizes to choose from. ( I have a larger inter ear distance than the norm) - use only simple generic compensation for ear shape above ~4kHz. - the shoulder reflection controlled by head tracking data, the simplest way is to assume the listener is stationary and only turns his head. Could this be implemented to be a parametric controlled filter set? Can anyone create a binaural encoding using this? I think the shoulder compensation is something that have not been done. As far as I know all binaural encodings are done using data sets with a fixed head and shoulder position. Best regards Bo-Erik Sandholm Stockholm -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160125/039046f6/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. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] Renting a TetraMic or other ambisonic mic
On 22-Jan-16 22:36, John Leonard wrote: We also had five MKH416s arranged in around the boat as a sort-of wide 5.0 system. As a matter of interest did this arrangement give you lower engine noise? I can see that spaced directional mics could be used for that purpose, putting the dead side of each mic to the source. Or was the engine noise so LF that it wound its way into everything anyway? Mind you, I don't suppose the spatial image from this array was terribly attractive;} Chris Woolf --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] ST250 Schematic?
I think you'll find schematics very hard to obtain, but if you contact Peter Schillebeeckx at Soundfield (now TSL) - http://www.tslproducts.com/contact/ - he's a very helpful man. Chris Woolf On 24-Nov-15 23:28, Rudy Chalupa wrote: Hello everyone! I'm new to this list, but not to Ambisonics - I had the firstCalrec MK IV microphone in North America. (Apparently my modifications to the MK IV got mentioned here in October.) Anyway, I just purchased a used ST250 which sounds like it might be a little dodgy. I understand the internals are quite different from the MK IV or MK V. I've located a pdf of the user's manual, but a schematic would be most welcome. Does anyone have one? Do you think TSL would be forthcoming with such a thing? Cordially, Rudy Chalupa Pleiades Audio + Electronics -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20151124/96f2f9ab/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. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ 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] BBC Sound: Now and Next - Call for participation
Sound: Now and Next The future of broadcast audio 19th - 20th May 2015, BBC Broadcasting House, London The BBC are pleased to announce 'Sound: Now and Next' - a two-day event on the future of broadcast audio. It will feature talks from leading figures on the subject as well as a host of demonstrations of state-of-the-art technology. Confirmed speakers so far include wildlife recordist Chris Watson, composer and sound artist Nick Ryan, musician and inventor Tim Exile and dubbing mixer Martyn Harries. We are currently seeking proposals for contributions to the technology fair which will form a significant part of the event. Please see the following website for more details and to sign up for email updates. http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/events/sound2015 ___ 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] theatrical ambisonics
srs labs has developed mda 3d audio which is essentially pcm+x,y,z and supports binaural - or any number of speakers. it is almost ambisonics at the pcm digital level. it is also open source. DTS aquiered srs labs and is developing development tools and a back end to there neox 11.2 system for mda play back. mda is ambisonics object oriented pcm + x,y,z spatial info.it is also backwards compatible with stereo an multi channeel audio so uhj over stereo could still be useful. Chris Boozer > > From: Martin Leese >To: sursound@music.vt.edu >Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:14 AM >Subject: Re: [Sursound] theatrical ambisonics > > >Iain Mott wrote: > >> These are excellent references, thank you! Curious to know why >> ambisonics and uhj encoding ceased to be used in the 90s? I know nothing >> about digital radio - but is dolby surround or some other surround >> format being used presently in Europe, elsewhere? What is the present >> state of play in surround broadcasting? > >If what I write below is incorrect then I am sure >somebody will correct me. > >Ambisonics (and UHJ) died in the 1980s. >What remains is a few enthusiasts. These >include a few radio producers who broadcast >programmes in UHJ, but they do so without the >support (and often without the knowledge) of >their various managements. Dolby MP would >be a poor choice for stereo transmission >because, unlike UHJ, it is not stereo >compatible. > >Looking at the equipment installed in people's >homes then the only surround format that >currently has a chance is 5.1. One problem is >lack of material. An example of what is >possible was the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the >Galaxy: The Tertiary Phase, broadcast by BBC >Radio 4/Above the Title Productions in 2004. >Two mixes were produced: Stereo and 5.1. >The stereo mix was broadcast via radio, >Internet, and CD. The 5.1 mix was broadcast >via Internet and DVD-Video. > >(I have "The Tertiary Phase" as 5.1 WMA files; >if anybody in interested in them contact me >off-list. I have never been able to play them.) > >The present state of play is that no national >broadcasting organisation is regularly >transmitting in surround. However, a number >of music radio stations are currently >broadcasting in 5.1. National broadcasting >organisations are investigating other surround >technologies, such as Ambisonics (BBC) and >22.2 (NHK, BBC). > >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 > > > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130516/320a2534/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] EBU workshop on immersive audio over headphones
On 27 Apr 2013, at 17:00, sursound-requ...@music.vt.edu wrote: > Hi, Chris, > > Is anyone able to share the PPTs or audio/video of this upcoming quite > valuable conference? > Thanks a lot in advance. > > Best regards, > Junfeng > > Junfeng Li, Ph.D., Professor > Institute of Acoustics > Chinese Academy of Sciences > Dear Junfeng, I am sorry but the Powerpoint and audio/video recordings are only available to attendees and EBU members. Best regards, Chris http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] EBU workshop on immersive audio over headphones
The European Broadcasting Union is holding a two-day workshop on binaural audio on May 15th-16th. http://tech.ebu.ch/Jahia/site/tech/cache/offonce/events/audio2013 The programme contains an excellent array of speakers from the broadcasting industry and academia, with panel discussions and many demonstrations. Registration is free to EBU members and 100CHF for non-members. With more and more people able to access broadcast content on portable devices, the quality of the headphone listening experience is becoming increasingly important. This workshop will explore how binaural audio technology could create immersive spatial sound experiences for those listening over headphones. The subject is relevant to both radio and television, as well as online media. Presentations will provide an introduction to many different aspects of binaural audio, from production and distribution challenges to open research questions. The panel discussions will allow content makers and technologists to question the technology providers and researchers about how we can use binaural audio to enhance the listening experience for audiences. Chris Pike http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130426/63fc53ec/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] srslabs mda audio open format appears to be b-format at the pcm level
encoding of timing and x-y-z meta data with p.c.m. enabling headphone to any number of speakers to be decoded from the same data without up mixing or down mixing.It is an open source project and appears to be a digital encoding of b-format at the p.c.m level and as such is more of a p.c.m.+ than a new codec and is open so anyone can implement it.It will allow for Ambisonics by design as well as wave field synthesis. Srslabs was also just acquired by DTS; When combined with their Neo-X technology we end up with a fully functional digital b-format playback environment for the home. Here are a couple of informative links. http://www.srslabs.com/landing.aspx?id=2459 http://www.srslabs.com/landing.aspx?id=2492 http://www.srslabs.com/landing.aspx?id=2493 http://www.srslabs.com/landing.aspx?id=2495 http://www.3daa.org/ Chris Boozer -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120726/57dafe1a/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Olympics 22.2 audio demo
Dear Sursounders, BBC R&D in partnership with Japan's NHK will be screening the Olympics using NHK's 'Super-High Vision' system this summer. The system combines 4k video (16 times bigger than HD) with a 22.2 audio system (described here: http://www.nhk.or.jp/digital/en/technical/pdf/IBC2007_08040907.pdf http://www.nhk.or.jp/digital/en/technical/pdf/IBC2007_08040907 .pdf> ) It will be available in three sites across the UK - London, Glasgow and Bradford. Free tickets are being made available to the public, and they can be booked using the links below: London (pre-games): http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision_pregames_ bh http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision _pregames_bh> London (Olympics): http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision_olympics_ bh http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision _olympics_bh> Glasgow (pre-games): http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision_pregames_ pq http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision _pregames_pq> Glasgow (Olympics): http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision_olympics_ pq http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/events/super_hivision _olympics_pq> I'm not sure where or when the Bradford tickets are being released, but if you're interested let me know. Chris ____ Chris Baume BBC Research and Development Centre House, 56 Wood Lane, London, W12 7SB 07872412880 bbc.co.uk/rd/sound http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120613/d6a11a8d/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Dolby Atmos
cool new audio playback format,that seems to vbe a combination of ambisonic principals and object based rendering. Link: http://www.dolby.com/uploadedFiles/Assets/US/Doc/Professional/Dolby-Atmos-Next-Generation-Audio-for-Cinema.pdf (sent via Shareaholic) Chris Boozer -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120425/29ea2bec/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 44, Issue 22
...or you could wait for people to start making Thunderbird-enabled audio interfaces? They'd be plenty fast, though you'd be back to buying apple... I think you mean Thunderbolt ;} - and the rumour is that it will be coming to Asus and Sony PCs in April, so you may be able to avoid filling Apple's coffers. Chris Woolf ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] 32-channel capture
Or four Sounddevices 788T's? they lock together just fine, apparently. 96k only though Why on earth would one want anything higher than (or even as high as) 96k? Chris Woolf ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Maybe we should?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCzi75bhOcI I thought this was fun. Hope you enjoy it. Chris Pike Research Engineer - Audio Team BBC Research & Development 5th Floor, Dock House, MediaCityUK, Salford, M50 2LH E: chris.p...@bbc.co.uk M: 07714 956931 T: external: 0303 040 9534 (internal: 9534) http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/2015/263d84b4/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] BBC job position
Dear Sursounders, A job advert has just been released for an experienced audio researcher/professional to lead the audio research at the BBC. The position also includes heading up the newly formed BBC Audio Research Partnership (http://bbc.in/nHvUUv). "The initial focus areas include periphony, spatial audio and Ambisonics (including aspects such as recording, encoding, reproduction, and mixing), and the related area of room acoustics (studio design for 3D, living room influence on 3D). Other current research areas include source separation and music information retrieval (including automatic metadata generation)." The position is located at our brand-new purpose-built R&D laboratory at Salford Quays, and the deadline for applications is 31st July. I would appreciate if you could forward the following link onto anybody you feel may be suitable or interested. https://careers.bbc.co.uk/fe/tpl_bbc01.asp?newms=jj&id=39432&aid=15716 Many thanks, Chris _ Chris Baume BBC Research & Development mobile: 07313331 / 07872412880 email: chris.ba...@bbc.co.uk web: http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats andtheir viability for actual 360 degree sound
60 degrees seems excessive head movement for someone seated listening to speakers.. Why ? It's a natural thing to do if there is any significant sound from that direction. Why should being listening to speakers make any difference ? I like to forget I'm listening to speakers. And *if* I turn my head, for whatever reason, and the illusion collapses, I'm not impressed... [Fons] I'd take that a stage further - the ideal arrangement would allow you to move around within the sound field with complete freedom. You should indeed be unaware of where any speakers are - and "sweet spots", and need to face rigidly in one direction, are anathema to the anyone but a dedicated (and perhaps blinkered?) enthusiast. I've only ever had the chance to observe two demos (one Ambisonic, one WFS) which have been sufficiently impressive (with the programme material available) that the NON-cognoscenti recognised that they were in a space that wasn't the same as the physical room. Chris Woolf ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Binaural Microphone options
Hi all, There are various options around for binaural recording. When considering recordings on real heads (for individualised HRTF sets) what microphones do you recommend? Clearly there going to be a large range in price and quality. B&K 4101 for example may be out of my price range. On a related note what is the best approach for blockage of the ear canal when making these recordings with in-ear microphones? Any references would be appreciated. Also I have some moulded ear plugs with removable filters. Does anyone have any experience with using custom moulds with microphones? Thanks Chris Pike http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this. ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Speaker configs + subwoofers
Kef also has a concentric technology in their uni-q drivers. Kef makes excellent speakers is an English company an has affordable models utilizing the uni-q technology at a far more affordable price point than wharfedale.Check ebay they have a new satelite wall mountable uni-q for less than 100 dollars.http://cgi.ebay.com/KEF-Hts1001-2-Bookshelf-Speaker-w-Wall-Bracket-Each-/130516799735?pt=Speakers_Subwoofers&hash=item1e636850f7 Chris Boozer > >From: Gerard Lardner >To: sursound@music.vt.edu >Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2011 4:03 PM >Subject: Re: [Sursound] Speaker configs + subwoofers > >There was a discussion about speakers for Ambisonics a few years ago. I >can't remember exactly when. But I do seem to recall that it was >suggested that speakers having a single axis (e.g. a single, wide-range >driver or concentric drivers) would be better than speakers having >drivers spread relatively widely over the front plane; also that phase >coherence between drivers is important. I have never tried concentric >speakers, e.g. Tannoy Dual-Concentric; too expensive for me; but I have >been able to collect eight Wharfedale Diamond Pro 8.1 Active speakers >for my Ambisonic set-up. They seem to me to be good, but I have not >heard a reference Ambisonic set-up to compare them with. > >Gerard Lardner > >On 10/05/2011 01:54, Marc Lavallée wrote: >> I found very little information about domestic Ambisonic speakers >> setups. All I know is that it's better to use the same speakers and >> amplifiers for the whole setup... I adopted the layout proposed by >> Bo-Erik Sandholm (10 speakers), and now I have to find the right >> speakers. >> >> Here's some random thoughts (comments are welcome): >> >> - Speaker design really is an art form; I can't build very good >> speakers myself, so eventually I will buy two for my main stereo >> system (and they will sound much better than they look). >> >> - I can build "good enough" speakers based on tutorials and >> software. I did it and it's worth the effort. Bass-reflex enclosures >> are easier to design and build than quarter-wave enclosures. >> >> - The frequency response of some good full-range drivers is about >> 70Hz-20Khz. They are perfect for near-field listening, and probably >> appropriate for a small Ambisonic setup. >> >> - For Ambisonic reproduction in a small room, I can't afford to buy or >> build fancy speakers (like quarter-wave), but I can build many (10+) >> speakers using full-range drivers in sealed enclosures. >> >> - I learned that it's possible to use subwoofers with Ambisonic; but a >> minimum of four subwoofers are required with a dedicated FOA decoder. >> That's a reason why I'd like to build small enclosures for small >> drivers with a limited bass response instead of larger enclosures >> with bass extension (either bass-reflex or quarter-wave). >> >> - Bass reproduction is important for directional cues. It is influenced >> by the room response (or modes) and the placement of the subwoofers >> (more than their size and quality). >> >> - Digital room correction and EQ are useful tools; we should use them >> instead of looking for speakers with the "best" frequency response. >> >> Is there any web site (article, book) on how to build speakers >> specifically for Ambisonic reproduction? >> >> -- >> Marc >___ >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/20110510/02d3194f/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Ambisonia hosting
G'day Guys, I don't know the right person to talk to, so I apologize for the blanket list posting. I have some room on my server if you need some place to host ambisonia. It's not super dooper fast, but I assume there won't be 1000's of movies of cats playing the keyboard (unlike some other sites) to slow things down. If the right person is on here, let me know and I'll hook you up. Cheers, Chris On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:00 AM, wrote: > Send Sursound mailing list submissions to > sursound@music.vt.edu > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > sursound-requ...@music.vt.edu > > You can reach the person managing the list at > sursound-ow...@music.vt.edu > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Sursound digest..." > > > When replying, please remember to edit your Subject line to that of the > original message you are replying to, so it is more specific than "Re: > Contents of Sirsound-list digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: cross-talk cancellation used in binaural sound (e deleflie) > > > -- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:35:45 +1100 > From: e deleflie > Subject: Re: [Sursound] cross-talk cancellation used in binaural sound > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > >>> Unfortunately ambisonia.com seems to be unobtainium. ?I know this has been >>> asked before but is ambisonia.com archived anywhere and will it be available >>> again? > > ambisonia.com is down permanently. Apologies for any inconvenience. > There is a chance that Paul Hodges might host some of Ambisonia's > content on his servers. But it will be under a different umbrella. > >> Part of it seems to be here: http://www.soundofspace.com/ > > I am using soundOfSpace.com as a test bed for various ideas. It is in > permanent beta for now. Use it at your own risk. > > Etienne > >> >> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com) >> ___ >> 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 > > > End of Sursound Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 > *** > -- Chris Cody Production and Audio Coordinator Australian National Academy of Music 210 Bank Street South Melbourne VIC 3205 Ph: + 61 3 9645 7807 Fax: + 61 3 9645 7922 Mob: + 61 413 726 930 www.anam.com.au ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] B format recording
G'day guys, Does anybody know weather it is possible to record and mix B format in Pro Tools 9? I have been looking around for a plugin, with not much luck. It appears SoundField have one, but I can;t find out if it is compatible with PT9 (only PT8HD or VST) I have just started teching at a venue with a pro tools rig, and while I despise it, I think I'm stuck with it for the time being. I am using a SoundField SPS422B system. I'm recording live classical music from solo instrumental, chamber (about 4-10 musicians) through to small orchestras (up to 100 musos) From what I can gather from the patch, the last technician used to take a stereo out from the SoundField processor, mix in any spot mics via a hardware mixer and record a 2 track audio mix to CD and Pro Tools. This looses so much of the value of the SoundField, and want to do better. While I don't have the gear to do surround at the moment, I would like to have the B format stuff sussed in stereo first so that I can upgrade later in the year. Basically what I need is: A way to mix any additional spot mics or solo mics into the B format universe A way to mix the B format from the soundfield and spot mics into mono/stereo (upgradeable to surround) All using pro tools 9. :( If Pro Tools isn't an option, what do you recommend that will work with a digi 002? (until I can upgrade and remove digidesign rubbish from my life all together) Thanks in advance. Chris Cody -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110224/a83dd4e3/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio - Overview of SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio (CC3DA)
I agree with you. Hopefully it is as you have surmised. Chris Boozer - Original Message > From: Ronald C.F. Antony > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Sent: Wed, February 16, 2011 10:08:55 PM > Subject: Re: [Sursound] SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio - Overview of SRS Circle >Cinema 3D Audio (CC3DA) > > On 16 Feb 2011, at 23:01, chris boozer wrote: > > > seems like a blatant rip off to me of ambisonics to me. > > If I understand it correctly, AND it indeed uses Ambisonic principles and > not >some ill-devised pseudo-soundfield-theory, THEN it's actually a real >progress, >because as I understand it, the idea of the system is that it's >self-calibrating. > > In other words, it would likely by generating some sort of IR of the room >create a decoding scheme that fits that particular room and that particular >speaker setup AUTOMATICALLY, sort of like Audissey and similar systems try to >do time alignment and EQ for the room, and taking it a step further, allowing >the surround sound to be decoded for everything from 2.0 to n.m systems >automatically after running a simple test tone sequence through the setup. > > That would be HUGE, because the biggest stumbling block even for something > as >trivial as first-order horizontal-only Ambisonics is to get it set up >properly >at the listener's home. > > Anything that automates that and has a chance of real commercial success by >being in bed with the consumer electronics manufacturers and content creators >is highly welcomed by me, because if it's a rip-off or not matters a whole >lot >less to me than whether or not this becomes mainstream, and whether or not I >stand a chance of getting music in a suitable format e.g. on iTunes DURING MY >LIFETIME. > > Because if traditional Ambisonics is any indication: no real progress has > been >made in over 30 years, and the one label that methodically pushed Ambisonic >production, Nimbus, is virtually sidelined these days. > > Ronald > > -- next part -- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: smime.p7s > Type: application/pkcs7-signature > Size: 4850 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: ><https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110217/68d72793/attachment.bin> > > ___ > 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] SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio - Overview of SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio (CC3DA)
seems like a blatant rip off to me of ambisonics to me. Chris Boozer - Original Message > From: Dave Malham > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Sent: Tue, February 15, 2011 5:46:18 AM > Subject: Re: [Sursound] SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio - Overview of SRS Circle >Cinema 3D Audio (CC3DA) > > Well I would comment, if the article or their website actually said anything >that could be commented > > upon :-) > > On 15/02/2011 13:40, chris boozer wrote: > > looks like srs labs has an improved version of ambisonics. I wonder what the > > list thinks of there tech. Link: > > > > >http://hometheater.about.com/od/hometheateraudiobasics/a/Srs-Circle-Cinema-3d-Audio-Basics.htm > > > > > (sent via Shareaholic) > > > > > > Chris Boozer > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't pick lemons. > > See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. > > http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html > > ___ > > Sursound mailing list > > Sursound@music.vt.edu > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > > -- >These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer > /*/ > /* Dave Malham http://music.york.ac.uk/staff/research/dave-malham/ */ > /* Music Research Centre */ > /* Department of Music"http://music.york.ac.uk/"; */ > /* The University of York Phone 01904 432448 */ > /* Heslington Fax 01904 432450 */ > /* York YO10 5DD*/ > /* UK'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' */ > /* "http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/"; */ > /*/ > > ___ > Sursound mailing list > Sursound@music.vt.edu > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio - Overview of SRS Circle Cinema 3D Audio (CC3DA)
looks like srs labs has an improved version of ambisonics. I wonder what the list thinks of there tech. Link: http://hometheater.about.com/od/hometheateraudiobasics/a/Srs-Circle-Cinema-3d-Audio-Basics.htm (sent via Shareaholic) Chris Boozer Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] Rycote shockmount with TetraMic
I'm delighted by your excellent description of the version of lyre mount for the TetraMic. I have added a page to my web site showing the result: <http://ambisonic.info/tetramic/rycote> Paul Hodges I can see that sliding any grommets, split or otherwise, on a knurled stem is always going to be very difficult. The only comment I would make is that though the microphone may be delicate the lyre elements are not. At exhibitions it is common practice to take a lyre and twist the insides round and round till the whole thing ends up as knot. They always survive and their shape memory brings them back to what they should be very quickly. Actually, you can take the entire INV7 mount and hurl it a concrete wall, and it will survive, which shows that modern plastics can beat metal hands down - but do take the mic out first.... Chris Woolf ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
