[Sursound] Any experience with dome acoustics?

2013-02-18 Thread Neil Waterman
Greetings, Does anyone on the list have prior experience installing ambi-based 3D sound into 'dome' shaped replay environments? Any tips, specifically on speaker placement, approaches, etc. The problems I am facing include a 12 foot 240 degree partial dome made of fabric, an 18 foot 240

[Sursound] Blue Ripple Sound

2012-09-26 Thread Neil Waterman
Hi All, Are any of the folks from Blue Ripple Sound lurking on this forum? If you are, or anyone else has contacts with them, could you ping me back? Thanks! - Neil ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu

Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

2012-04-11 Thread Neil Waterman
We have been using ambisonics for several years now to provide immersive soundfields for use within the flight simulation and training environments. Prior to this we were using gain panning that was restrictive and highly coupled to each installation. The use of ambi allows us to port a model

Re: [Sursound] question about simple equation

2012-03-20 Thread Neil Waterman
Hi Giuseppe, Glad your sense of humor has survived your first skirmish with the big brains here on the Sursound forum... don't ever be put off or feel intimidated here - ask your questions with abandon (there is no such thing as a bad question... etc). Just occasionally you might need to

Re: [Sursound] Distance perception (really speaker wire discussion!)

2011-07-28 Thread Neil Waterman
The review comments on Amazon for the Audio Quest K2 speaker cable are very entertaining in the most: http://www.amazon.com/AudioQuest-K2-terminated-speaker-cable/product-reviews/B000J36XR2/ Certainly more interesting than some dubious pseudo-expert 'review' - Neil On 7/28/2011 1:03 PM,

Re: [Sursound] Distance perception (really speaker wire discussion!)

2011-07-27 Thread Neil Waterman
I wrote the following as a guide for internal use at my work-place a few years back: One don't that I hold close is this: Don't be mislead by the many snake oil and, smoke and mirrors cable vendors that seem to imbue speaker cables with magical (and astronomically expensive) properties. No

Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound

2011-07-09 Thread Neil Waterman
ML: Maybe it can; is there a way to up convert non-ambisonics recordings to horizontal ambisonics? If you down sample a 48kHz recording to 16kHz what happens? All the audio information above 8kHz is lost right? If you up convert back to 48kHz can you recover the bandwidth lost? No. You just

Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound

2011-07-09 Thread Neil Waterman
Totally agree 100%. Personally I would state that I have a totally different experience when listening to the same recordings via loudspeakers versus headphones. Headphones rarely give me a the orchestra/band is in front of me presentation (and no it is not a function of cheap or crappy

Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound

2011-07-08 Thread Neil Waterman
My personal opinion: a) 3D sound from 2 speakers Rubbish. Unless energy is arriving from the general direction of the supposed source, the best any system can do is present some psycho-acoustically confusing cues that attempt to fool the brain, but sadly (for the 2-channel snake-oil folk)

Re: [Sursound] Test message

2011-05-22 Thread Neil Waterman
Rapture apparently skipped me at least, but no there was nothing since your last post John - Neil On 5/22/2011 10:08 AM, John Leonard wrote: So was there anything between my post on the 19th about Rycote wind-jammers and my test message? Or has everyone else succumbed to The Rapture?

Re: [Sursound] Exciting news anyone?

2011-03-24 Thread Neil Waterman
Oh, the suspense of it all I'm all of a tizz - Neil On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Svein Berge wrote: Hello! Hold your horses. There will be news coming out next week! (I'm trying to implement a press strategy here... :-) Svein On 24. mars. 2011, at 15:02, Andrew Levine wrote: