Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-03-04 Thread Dave Malham 
Yep, that certainly agrees with my experience in the past with earlier and
cruder decoders over larger areas.

  Dave

On 3 March 2016 at 23:40, Aaron Heller  wrote:

> In BLaH11 (AES 137, 10/2014, Los Angeles) , Eric and I compared horizontal
> FOA over a 2-meter radius 4-speaker diamond vs. 8-speaker octagon with
> binaural dummy head measurements and listening tests.  (classic decoding:
> 2-band, rV=1 at LF, rE=sqrt(1/2) at HF, 400 Hz xover, NFC).
>
> The TL;DR summary is yes, with 8 speakers what Solvang/2008 calls spectral
> impairment is clearly audible in the vicinity of the sweet spot as an HF
> rolloff or dullness of the sound, but as you move away from the central
> location, the soundfield collapses to the nearest loudspeaker much faster
> with only 4 loudspeakers.
>
> Here's the AES permalink for the paper.
>
>   http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17452
>
> --
> Aaron (hel...@ai.sri.com)
> Menlo Park, CA  US
>
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Martin Leese <
> martin.le...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
>
> > Martin Leese wrote:
> >
> > > Peter Lennox wrote:
> > >>  Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if
> I've
> > >> missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or so -
> but
> > >> I
> > >> just may have missed the odd discussion!)
> > >>
> > >> Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders,
> > >> speaker
> > >> layouts and particular rooms?
> > >
> > > Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
> > > early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
> > > "sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
> > > This post used to be available in my area on
> > > the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
> > > been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
> > > sure of the best way for making them available.
> > >
> > > ...
> > >> (and I haven't even mentioned the possible
> > >> variety of speaker dispersion characteristics!)
> > >
> > > Dermot also looked at this.
> >
> > I have made the research of Dermot Furlong
> > available on one of my Google Sites at:
> > https://sites.google.com/site/mytemporarydownloads/
> >
> > Scroll down to the section "Ambisonic stuff"
> > and look for the file "dermot.zip".
> >
> > 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 - 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/20160303/0e3b7905/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.
>



-- 

As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University.

These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University

Dave Malham
Honorary Fellow, Department of Music
The University of York
York YO10 5DD
UK

'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-03-03 Thread Aaron Heller 
In BLaH11 (AES 137, 10/2014, Los Angeles) , Eric and I compared horizontal
FOA over a 2-meter radius 4-speaker diamond vs. 8-speaker octagon with
binaural dummy head measurements and listening tests.  (classic decoding:
2-band, rV=1 at LF, rE=sqrt(1/2) at HF, 400 Hz xover, NFC).

The TL;DR summary is yes, with 8 speakers what Solvang/2008 calls spectral
impairment is clearly audible in the vicinity of the sweet spot as an HF
rolloff or dullness of the sound, but as you move away from the central
location, the soundfield collapses to the nearest loudspeaker much faster
with only 4 loudspeakers.

Here's the AES permalink for the paper.

  http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17452

--
Aaron (hel...@ai.sri.com)
Menlo Park, CA  US

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Martin Leese <
martin.le...@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:

> Martin Leese wrote:
>
> > Peter Lennox wrote:
> >>  Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if I've
> >> missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or so - but
> >> I
> >> just may have missed the odd discussion!)
> >>
> >> Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders,
> >> speaker
> >> layouts and particular rooms?
> >
> > Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
> > early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
> > "sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
> > This post used to be available in my area on
> > the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
> > been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
> > sure of the best way for making them available.
> >
> > ...
> >> (and I haven't even mentioned the possible
> >> variety of speaker dispersion characteristics!)
> >
> > Dermot also looked at this.
>
> I have made the research of Dermot Furlong
> available on one of my Google Sites at:
> https://sites.google.com/site/mytemporarydownloads/
>
> Scroll down to the section "Ambisonic stuff"
> and look for the file "dermot.zip".
>
> 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 - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-03-03 Thread Martin Leese 
Martin Leese wrote:

> Peter Lennox wrote:
>>  Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if I've
>> missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or so - but
>> I
>> just may have missed the odd discussion!)
>>
>> Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders,
>> speaker
>> layouts and particular rooms?
>
> Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
> early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
> "sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
> This post used to be available in my area on
> the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
> been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
> sure of the best way for making them available.
>
> ...
>> (and I haven't even mentioned the possible
>> variety of speaker dispersion characteristics!)
>
> Dermot also looked at this.

I have made the research of Dermot Furlong
available on one of my Google Sites at:
https://sites.google.com/site/mytemporarydownloads/

Scroll down to the section "Ambisonic stuff"
and look for the file "dermot.zip".

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 - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-23 Thread Marc Lavallee 
On Tue, 23 Feb 2016 17:21:06 +0100
Jörn Nettingsmeier  wrote:

> On 02/22/2016 09:28 PM, Martin Leese wrote:
> > Peter Lennox wrote:
> >  
> >>   Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me
> >> if I've missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20
> >> years, or so - but I just may have missed the odd discussion!)
> >>
> >> Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between
> >> decoders, speaker layouts and particular rooms?  
> >
> > Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
> > early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
> > "sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
> > This post used to be available in my area on
> > the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
> > been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
> > sure of the best way for making them available.  
> 
> I would very much like to have that post. It could be made available
> on the internet somewhere, and if it is still relevant in the light
> of recent decoding techniques, used as a reference on the wikipedia
> page on ambisonic listening rigs.

I can add it on ambisonia.com, in the area for Martin Leese; I
already asked him.
--
Marc
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-23 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier 

On 02/22/2016 09:28 PM, Martin Leese wrote:

Peter Lennox wrote:


  Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if I've
missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or so - but I
just may have missed the odd discussion!)

Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders, speaker
layouts and particular rooms?


Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
"sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
This post used to be available in my area on
the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
sure of the best way for making them available.


I would very much like to have that post. It could be made available on 
the internet somewhere, and if it is still relevant in the light of 
recent decoding techniques, used as a reference on the wikipedia page on 
ambisonic listening rigs.



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

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

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

Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-22 Thread Peter Lennox 
downloaded it, thanks
Dr. Peter Lennox
Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy
Senior Lecturer in Perception
College of Arts
University of Derby

Tel: 01332 593155

From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Eero Aro 
[eero@dlc.fi]
Sent: 22 February 2016 20:58
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

Ok, here. I put it in my DB:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22100835/Comparative%20study%20of%20effective%20soundfield%20reconstruction%20Furlong%20AES%20198909012014_.pdf

I won't keep it there for a long time. Please download.

Eero
___
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.

The University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and reserves the 
right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this was sent to you in error, 
please select unsubscribe.

Unsubscribe and Security information contact:   info...@derby.ac.uk
For all FOI requests please contact:   f...@derby.ac.uk
All other Contacts are at http://www.derby.ac.uk/its/contacts/
___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-22 Thread Eero Aro 

Ok, here. I put it in my DB:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/22100835/Comparative%20study%20of%20effective%20soundfield%20reconstruction%20Furlong%20AES%20198909012014_.pdf

I won't keep it there for a long time. Please download.

Eero
___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-22 Thread Eero Aro 

Here's one paper Dermot that was involved with:

http://tinyurl.com/jnsla88

Can't find the other one...

Eero
___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-22 Thread Peter Lennox 
ah! - thanks - I know Dermot, I'll ask him
regards
ppl
Dr. Peter Lennox
Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy
Senior Lecturer in Perception
College of Arts
University of Derby

Tel: 01332 593155

From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Martin Leese 
[martin.le...@stanfordalumni.org]
Sent: 22 February 2016 20:28
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Different usages, different spaces, different 
decoders?

Peter Lennox wrote:

>  Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if I've
> missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or so - but I
> just may have missed the odd discussion!)
>
> Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders, speaker
> layouts and particular rooms?

Dermot Furlong looked at the last two in the
early 1990s.  He made a lengthy post to
"sursound" in June 1996 describing his work.
This post used to be available in my area on
the Ambisonia.com site, but it seems to have
been deleted.  I still have the files, but am not
sure of the best way for making them available.

...
> (and I haven't even mentioned the possible
> variety of speaker dispersion characteristics!)

Dermot also looked at this.

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 - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

The University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and reserves the 
right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this was sent to you in error, 
please select unsubscribe.

Unsubscribe and Security information contact:   info...@derby.ac.uk
For all FOI requests please contact:   f...@derby.ac.uk
All other Contacts are at http://www.derby.ac.uk/its/contacts/
___
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] Different usages, different spaces, different decoders?

2016-02-22 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier 

On 02/22/2016 11:24 AM, Peter Lennox wrote:

Following on from discussions of decoder solutions: Forgive me if
I've missed this (I've been watching sursound for about 20 years, or
so - but I just may have missed the odd discussion!)

Has anyone systematically studied the interactions between decoders,
speaker layouts and particular rooms?

I ask because, it seems to me that interactions between room
acoustics and speaker positioning are known to have significant
psychoacoustic (and aesthetic) effects. Informally, I've observed
ambisonics working better than it had any right to, in particularly
difficult rooms (big reflective empty shoebox, for example).

But in respect of particular speaker layouts, (as per the discussion
on avoiding too many speaker in the horizontal plane), it seems to me
that there could be non-trivial interactions, so that (for arguments'
sake) a particular room might benefit from 'this' speaker layout as
against 'that' speaker layout.

I would seem a monster task to test a wide variety of rooms each with
a wide variety of speaker layouts (and I haven't even mentioned the
possible variety of speaker dispersion characteristics!) - but in the
long run, it needs doing - and sufficient testing might reveal
'families' of layout-room acoustic relationships that can point to
underlying causal rules.

If it's been done, I'd like to read it, and if it hasn't - sounds
like I've just knocked together a precis proposal for a PhD project!


to me, the single most obnoxious effect is the phasiness. next is 
localisation precision, but a long way down. absolutely nobody cares 
about localisation accuracy, so optimising for minmum angular error 
seems undesirable to me (unless there is a very specific use case).


i've been thinking about modelling the interference patterns to minimize 
phasiness in a systematic way. haven't done that yet, but now that I 
learned how to work with the SFS toolkit, i will look at it.

after setting up many ambi rigs, these are my working hypotheses:

* don't be precise. measure to centimetres, but then add random delay 
errors in for subjectively nicer reproduction at low orders.
this is what needs to be tackled systematically. we need a rigorous 
technique to dither spatial aliasing optimally.
i guess we want the peaks and dips to be smeared out uniformly over a 
large area.


* reverberation is your friend. it smoothes away the phasiness. unless 
your content has subtle reverb which would be drowned in the room response.


* 3D rigs seem to localise worse but sound better for low orders, my 
guess is it's because of smoother interference patterns. their path 
length variation is different to that of horizontal speakers across the 
listening area, which might be helpful. that's why i tend to recommend 
3d rigs over higher-order horizontal-only ones, unless you're sure that 
all your content will be at maximum order. even then, some height is 
nice. at ICSA 2011, i heard a small IOSONO wfs rig being augmented 
rather haphazardly with just four small height speakers (which, to the 
best of my knowledge, were used "to taste" and not in any systematic 
way), and the improvement was absolutely striking, not for localisation, 
but for tone color and plausibility of space.


* i have a hunch that stacked rings, for all their wastefulness, seem to 
have very nice interference patterns. for example, the SPIRAL in 
huddersfield (triple octogon with zenith) is in a ridiculously dry room, 
but i was quite surprised about its first-order performance, especially 
since it has way to many speakers for that, in theory.


if somebody can suggest any measurements that are feasible in the field, 
i will gladly obtain them from any future rig that i get to set up. i 
guess room impulse responses would be the most important piece of the 
puzzle. maybe we should just sweep each speaker into a tetramic in the 
sweet spot as a start. with careful analysis, that should contain a lot 
of information about the speakers and the room. we get free-field 
response above a few hundred hertz, and below the schroeder frequency, 
we're in mode land anyways...


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

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio)
Tonmeister VDT

http://stackingdwarves.net

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