-
The traditional argument for N3D against SN3D is that N3D would force the
omni (W) channel down because the higher order signals have higher gain,
and that would reduce the available dynamic range.
That is true for a single encoded source, but not for a complex mix of
sources in
Depends how you see this, because in practice the home system of Atmos
is confined to two rings of speakers, and so you are confined to some
vertical perspective which is quite reduced. (And the cinema system
might struggle to pan positions between ground "bed" and the ceiling...)
I don't
Le 2021-05-23 à 18 h 30, Marc Lavallée a écrit :
In include/FLAC/format.h, I changed FLAC__MAX_CHANNELS from 8u to 128u
In src/libFLAC/format.c, I changed
FLAC__STREAM_METADATA_STREAMINFO_CHANNELS_LEN from 3 to 8.
The code compiles, but encoding more than 8 channels fails (I tried
with
tps://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20210523/ec3a6305/attachment.htm>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit
account or options, view ar
options, view archives and so on.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20210523/2a0145f9/attachment.htm>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https:
Le 2021-05-23 à 16 h 50, Fons Adriaensen a écrit :
Atmos can use any mix of (fixed position) channels and (moving) objects.
So it can be as simple as 5.0 or even stereo with a few objects for effects.
In terms of required channel count (for distribution) it's actually a very
effective format,
Correction:
The traditional argument for SN3D and against N3D ...
___
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.
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 04:57:30PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> (If ACN/SN3D in the above sense adds anything to Jerôme Daniel’s thesis of
> 2001 is another question.
What do you mean by 'adding anything to the thesis' ??
> ACN/N3D is also in wide use, supported by Mpeg, by ITU standards,
On 5/23/21, Martin Leese wrote:
> Extending FLAC to more than eight channels
> has been discussed in the past.For
> example, look in the sursound archives for this
> long post by me:
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] octofile release
> Date: Mon Jul 30 22:30:42 EDT 2018
Here is a link:
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 06:36:51PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Netflix streams Dolby Atmos at 768 kbit/s. (if available, so this is max.
> bitrate)
Atmos can use any mix of (fixed position) channels and (moving) objects.
So it can be as simple as 5.0 or even stereo with a few objects for
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 01:10:21PM -0600, Martin Leese wrote:
> Extending FLAC to more than eight channels
> has been discussed in the past.For
> example, look in the sursound archives for this
> long post by me:
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] octofile release
> Date: Mon Jul 30 22:30:42
The Mp4 container should work just fine with multiple audio streams
(even in FLAC).
8 channels for 2nd order HOA (with one vertical component missing) is
good enough, and that could be why it's a format used for VR audio. But
some audio enthousiasts could enjoy streams in 3rd order (and
Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> It would be relatively easy to extend FLAC to more than 8 channels.
>
> (To cover ?exotic? audio formats such as 5.1.4, HOA, and a plentitude
> of audio object standards.)
Extending FLAC to more than eight channels
has been discussed in the past.For
example, look in
Le 2021-05-23 à 13 h 36, Stefan Schreiber a écrit :
I know for sure that some companies would not like to spend 1 Mbit/s
bitrate (or even more) on some HOA track at 3rd or 4th order. (I am
not making this up.)
An interesting option (to me) is to stream in lossless FOA and add
optional
ilman/private/sursound/attachments/20210523/67d0df88/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.
Le 2021-05-23 à 11 h 57, Stefan Schreiber a écrit :
> In this sense independent from the actual source format. (Which does
not have to be .caf, as Fons already wrote.)
Fons also wrote about the several advantages of CAF.
> - In my estimation you need standardization rather for the
scribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
- Fim da mensagem de Marc Lavallée -
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound
Le 2021-05-23 à 10 h 22, Stefan Schreiber a écrit :
> “So using the Ambix format in a CAF container with ALAC compression
is a good choice.”
> Seriously: Is a good choice for what?
Good for production, because Ambix is a recognized format, and maybe a
de-facto standard (without ALAC because
...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20210523/a75ccb44/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.
g 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/surs
You're so right (as always)...
It's documented here:
https://github.com/macosforge/alac/blob/master/ReadMe.txt
So, Ambix with a CAF container as a production format.
WavPack is still valuable (at least for my use cases).
Marc
Le 2021-05-23 à 09 h 43, Fons Adriaensen a écrit :
On Sun, May
t.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/20210523/03c3406
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 09:15:55AM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> I assumed that ALAC compression is for Apple-only devices, but it works on
> other platforms as well, and a quick test shows that ALAC can be a bit more
> efficient than WavPack (for file size, no idea about CPU usage).
>
> So
Fons, thanks for the precisions.
My question should have been "why CAF"?
I was more concerned by lossless audio compression, support for multiple
channels, and file size.
In
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266602800_AMBIX_-A_SUGGESTED_AMBISONICS_FORMAT,
WavPack is mentioned as a
On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 06:15:48PM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> In the document, "Universal Ambisonic" is described to work with WavPack.
"Universal Ambisonic" is as dead as can be, and that's probable the
best that could happen to it. It was precisely a desire to get rid
of ill-conceived
> 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...
26 matches
Mail list logo
