Re: [Sursound] ambdec as plugin (lv2, vst, vst3)

On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 05:58:57PM +0200, Robin Gareus wrote: > Ardour has not required in-place processing since v6 around 5 years ago. Good to know. > Yet when possible, a given plugin standards support it, the extra copy step > can be avoided and the same buffer pointer is passed for input a

Re: [Sursound] ambdec as plugin (lv2, vst, vst3)

On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 12:03:16PM +0200, Anders Vinjar wrote: > My complaint about missing inserts in fx-chains in Reaper was a general > one, not relating to Ambdec or any other decoder-output, or about the > plugin-version of ambdec for that matter. Would Reaper support a plugin with e.g 16 i

Re: [Sursound] ambdec as plugin (lv2, vst, vst3)

On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 10:52:20AM +0200, Anders Vinjar wrote: > A while ago (ca. 1 yr?) i stumbled across a plugin version of Fons' > ambdec, but can't find it anywhere now. > > Anybody knows where to look? > > A plugin would be useful esp. in Reaper.

Re: [Sursound] Reminder - Fully funded PhD opportunity at Edinburgh Napier University, researching Equally Safe Sound Design

> ... how these emotions might be represented sonically > ... in order to maximise empathy How emotions can be represented in any form is of course an interesting *artistic* question. But when this becomes a research project 'in order to maximise empathy' this feels very close to an attempt at

Re: [Sursound] A comparison of fifteen ambisonic microphones

On Sat, Nov 04, 2023 at 08:53:57AM +, Jack Reynolds wrote: > The noise floor of the F8 mic pre is about about 10dB below the > noise floor of a single tetramic capsule at 38dB gain at 1KHz. How do you arrive at this figure ? > I also need to repeat the test with an 80 Ohm resistor load for

Re: [Sursound] A comparison of fifteen ambisonic microphones

On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 12:34:52PM +, Jack Reynolds wrote: > I think the point here is we tested at two different pre-amps > gains, to eliminate that as a potential source of noise. > There was no difference in SNR, indicating the noise is generated > by the capsules and electronics, and not t

Re: [Sursound] MSG sphere beamforming sound

On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 07:03:35PM +, Gareth Fry wrote: > The beam forming is very powerful, but off course does obey the > pesky laws of physics! :-) I was involved six years or so ago in a similar project at my then employer, the research center of a very big company. The original project g

Re: [Sursound] ZYLIA spamming

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 09:29:24PM +, Thorsten Michels wrote: > In the end it's their job. And that's no excuse. Certainly not for sending unwanted e-mails from a 'no-reply' address which basically means 'listen to us and shut up'. Ciao, -- FA

[Sursound] ZYLIA spamming

Hello all, A few weeks ago I replied to ZYLIA spamming this list: >> I do not want to spam you with marketing info > Then why are you doing it ? and a few days later again, in response to a message to my private email address. Now they seem determined to continue the harassment, just today I

Re: [Sursound] Is it possible to mix ambisonic encoded information of different order?

On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Jan Jacob Hofmann wrote: > if a decode of 3rd *and* 7th order information - yielding in one > encoded file - would be mathematically correct if it comes to the > decoding of the higher order content. Would there be missing > something (maybe an overall low

Re: [Sursound] Volumetric audio recording solution - attractive discount

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 10:32:28AM +0200, anna.czerwoniec zylia.pl wrote: > I do not want to spam you with marketing info Then why are you doing it ? -- FA ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/su

Re: [Sursound] [Proposal] for HOA web-streaming-format

On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 06:03:09PM +, Thorsten Michels wrote: > If a lower order is streamed, the other channels will be left empty, with > digital "0", meaning absolutely NO signal. So the decoders can recognize it > and provide the correct decoding. That is in-band signalling, and a bad id

Re: [Sursound] about aviation [ot]

On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 05:04:53AM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > I've never flown a plane It shows... > What you do there is: > 1) you push down on the yoke to recover airspeed, Do that if you want to crash even sooner. > 2) you use ailerons to level off, You need to use ailerons, but certa

Re: [Sursound] [off-topic] Spirals

On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 12:50:31AM +, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > Is flying in a spiral not something you would do in some intentional way? Yes and no... There is no essential difference between a spiral and a normal turn, except that a spiral is usually not intentional and in that case it can

Re: [Sursound] So long CIPIC HRTF?

On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 07:08:51PM +, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > I am just “sharing” what a Swedish pilot and aviation engineer wrote to me, > discussing and clarifying your problem(s)... ;-) We were not discussing spins, either upright or inverted. A 'spiral', very different from any spin, w

Re: [Sursound] So long CIPIC HRTF?

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 05:06:39PM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > I'd put counter-aileron, maybe some rudder, and often pull down > to recover airspeed... 'pull down' ?? You either 'pull up' or 'push down'... And if you're in a spiral, there is no need to recover airspeed - it will be dangerous

Re: [Sursound] So long CIPIC HRTF?

On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 03:55:18PM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > I've actually taken a test towards that. I put my (our) Magic Wand at > maximum contact and force to my right lower skull, below the ear. I dropped > out. Then I re-did the experiment simply by exciting the earlobe. I didn't > drop o

Re: [Sursound] So long CIPIC HRTF?

On Sun, Feb 12, 2023 at 05:36:19AM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > > There exists papers showing that the we humans locks in to visual cues > > and our experience and allows vision to win. When the conflict is between auditory and visual, usually the visual cues will dominate. > Just ask them pil

Re: [Sursound] ChatGPT & Ambisonics

On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 06:55:02PM +, lenmoskow...@optonline.net wrote: > It made the same kind of mistakes that most users of traditional microphones > initially make about ambisonics and ambisonic microphones. It didn't make any mistake. Making a mistake requires a minimal level of underst

Re: [Sursound] 3 point XY - Anyone ever heard about this?

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

Re: [Sursound] 3 point XY - Anyone ever heard about this?

On Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 07:08:12PM +, Thorsten Michels wrote: > It seems to be a very special (aka very unknown) setup with three > supercardioids. > In the YT-Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA6MZPNVyZU, (only available > in German) the author claims, that this setup is based on someth

Re: [Sursound] about principled rendering of ambisonic to binaural

On Sun, Sep 11, 2022 at 07:21:50PM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > If the directional > sampling was statistically uniform over the whole sphere of directions, and > in addition the sample of directions probed was to be in quadrature, it > would be an easy excercise in discrete summation to gain the

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Which microphone system to choose?

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 09:07:17PM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > The A->B converter provided by Zoom for the H3-VR is generic (there's no > calibration), so it's worth trying the H3-VR setting of the SPARTA Array2SH > converter plugin. Why would that be less 'generic' ? Ciao, -- FA __

Re: [Sursound] On 3D audio rendering for signals with the low sampling frequency

On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 08:57:33AM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > > You can't transport a grand piano on a bicycle. > It's possible with an extra wheel: > https://www.rimskipiano.org/rimski-s-bicycle-piano :-) Would like to see that going downhill... Many years ago (1970s) I was at a concert in

Re: [Sursound] On 3D audio rendering for signals with the low sampling frequency

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 06:40:28PM +0800, Junfeng Li wrote: > Do the early reflections contribute to elevation perception ? Well, something which is probably not related to HRTF does. Older people often have hearing limited to 8 kHz or even less, but may still be able to perceive elevation in som

Re: [Sursound] On 3D audio rendering for signals with the low sampling frequency

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 10:29:12AM +0100, Steven Boardman wrote: > You may get a slightly better performance by up sampling the 8khz to > 44.1/48 before convolution with the hrtf. If the upsampling is any good it will not produce any signal above the original limit of 8 kHz. So this won't make an

Re: [Sursound] Which microphone system to choose?

On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 12:30:25PM -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > Any graphs of the performance in elevation != 0? Ie: plots, of, say, "T" at > different frequencies? I'm really curious... For the EM and the Zylia I used two sets of 'measurements': - A set of 324 directions distributed '

Re: [Sursound] Which microphone system to choose?

On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 09:12:54AM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > Your document mentions that the results for the EM and the ZM-1 are based on > a numerical simulation; can you (briefly) elaborate? There is an analytical solution (involving spherical Bessel and Hankel functions) for diffraction by

Re: [Sursound] Which microphone system to choose?

On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 09:54:25PM +, Thorsten Michels wrote: > My first idea was to use my native Ambix-B-format microphone setup. This > would give me the greatest flexibility, right? Not really. Higher order AMB will give you much better results. There are not so many options. The followin

Re: [Sursound] auditory coronagraphy

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 03:47:51AM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > Why don't we do everything alike in audio? In particular, why don't we do > audio range coronagraphy, in order to separate the Loud from the Feeble? > Also, why don't we do physical, spatial modulation even on the projection > side,

Re: [Sursound] basic questions

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 10:06:34PM +, Thorsten Michels wrote: > As you have choosen a Sennheiser Ambeo VR Mic, I would stick with > Sennheiser, as it has the best match available. Absolutely not true. > So https://en-us.sennheiser.com/ambeo-abconverter is your A-B converter. It > comes as a

Re: [Sursound] format convention of Ambisonic Sound Library

Hello Richard, > Having been caught up in beach bum matters for some years, Happy to hear you are still providing the sharks with their daily ration of SCUBA divers... > I've lost track of all the latest machinations.  But is there > a simple authoritative definition of AmbiX ? The best as far

Re: [Sursound] format convention of Ambisonic Sound Library Files

On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 08:45:42AM +0100, Richard Dobson wrote: > I am still not too sure if > even now things are standardised enough for anyone to write a fresh file > format for it that pleases everyone. Suffice it to say, such things can't > just be written,they have to be implemented and test

Re: [Sursound] Reynolds mics

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 04:13:57PM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > With near field sources, the outwards radiating field from a point source > is reactive at each point. Pressure and velocity are *not* in phase, Even a pantophonic mic will pick that up that phase difference. > the vector describin

Re: [Sursound] Reynolds mics

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 02:57:51AM +0300, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > I ask because theory-wise pantophonic and periphonic soundfields > shouldn't be captured the same way, There is no such thing as a 'pantophonic sound field'. We don't live in Flatland. All microphones operate in 3D space. Unless yo

Re: [Sursound] Reynolds mics

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:57:27PM +, Tom Slater wrote: > I've used one but don't own one. Best 2nd order mic I've used or heard > recordings from by far! 2nd order ??? -- FA ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.

Re: [Sursound] Ambisonic UHJ Stereo decoder to speaker feeds

On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:18:26AM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: > ...unless you're trying something new, like fully general time variant HOA > reverberation. We were talking about rendering historical UHJ recordings. > ... which already at m=3 leaves you with 16 independent input and output > sig

Re: [Sursound] Tiltification Celebration

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 08:21:19PM +0100, Tim Ziemer wrote: > The weakness of the system is not the precision of the bubble location, > which is almost perfect, but the human’s uncertainty due to bubble > curvature, refraction, etc. Only if you don't know how to read it. Such bubble levels are

Re: [Sursound] Tiltification Celebration

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 01:11:52PM +0100, Tim Ziemer wrote: > Errors of more than one degree are very common. Where do you get that ? Just look up some specs. Even a cheap (20 Euro) plastic bubble level can have a sensitivity [1] of 1/2000 (0.03 degrees). Absolute accuracy is easy to check, just

Re: [Sursound] Tiltification Celebration

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 09:57:31AM +0100, Tim Ziemer wrote: > Through this app many people have learned > - what sonification is > - that they are well capable of leveling without looking > and, hopefully, started imagining what else sonification can offer to their > lives. Nice idea, but this

Re: [Sursound] Ambisonic UHJ Stereo decoder to speaker feeds

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 10:05:53PM +0200, Sampo Syreeni wrote: A lot of jargon without much real meaning, at least not as far as my limited brain powers are able to detect. > In particular, nobody's been bold enough yet to implement zero delay > provably constant effort convolutions of the Gardne

Re: [Sursound] the facebook group

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

Re: [Sursound] A 7th-order array with 16 microphones

On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 01:18:47PM +, Jens Ahrens wrote: > Absolutely, I’m happy to make that recording available. Give me some > time for that, I’ll need to adapt the implementation so that it outputs > the ambisonics signals in a useable format. The original mic signals would be interesti

Re: [Sursound] A 7th-order array with 16 microphones

Hi Jens, > I’m attaching Fig. 1 from the JASA article. Nothing was attached (or it got lost...) > If I’m not misreading, then the 7th order is available somewhere between > 2 kHz and 3 kHz and higher. Aliasing kicks in at around 4 kHz-ish. So the question is if this small range (less than one

Re: [Sursound] A 7th-order array with 16 microphones

Hi Jens, Thanks for your reply. > The lower end is limited by the radial filter gain that the user chooses. The radial filters are not the same like with SMAs, but they are very similar so that the limitations are the same. > >0th and 1st order are available for all frequencies. >2nd

Re: [Sursound] A 7th-order array with 16 microphones

On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 09:03:59AM +, Jens Ahrens wrote: > Their main advantage over conventional spherical microphone arraysi > is the fact that they require only 2N+1 microphones for Nth spherical > harmonic order For the microphone in the video, what is the usable frequency range for each

Re: [Sursound] Level difference between A-format and B-format

On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 10:06:11AM +0200, Arthur Sauer wrote: > It's not just the level differences that were worrying me Re. the original question: when I compute A/B matrices (for Core Sound or others), the gain is such that the four virtual capsules that make up B-format will have the same (o

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 08:19:40PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > However: <  Will > you mix an Atmos track in this way, in practice? (Doubts > here.) Elevated sources are often effects such as the helicopter hovering above. You typically don't have too many of them, so it makes sense to encode

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 04:45:45PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > Well, Mpeg-H Audio  uses N3D. It means people might "master" in N3D as well. Mpeg-H, like Atmos, is a delivery format used to encode the final result of a production. It is not used for intermediate storage of data that still nee

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 04:41:09PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > I see this, but (probably) the vertical resolution of Atmos will be limited > for binaural playback as well. Not if the elevated source is encoded as a separate object. The binaural renderer will use the metadata and can reproduc

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 01:10:10AM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/bs/R-REC-BS.2094-1-201706-I!!PDF-E.pdf That look like the typical 'standard by committee' enumerating all possible options rather than defining a rationally motivated choice. Happens all

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 12:52:12AM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > 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. Currently marketed home systems may hav

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 09:44:14AM +0200, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: > This made for a bad experience when listening to the file with Omnitone, > bad clipping distortion. > I had about 6 dB headroom in b format file but that is not enough🤗 If your file has headroom and Omnitone clips on decoding it

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

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.

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

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, an

Re: [Sursound] Matroska (was: ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)))

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 ef

Re: [Sursound] WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)

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 E

Re: [Sursound] ALAC (was Re: WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files))

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 using

Re: [Sursound] WavPack (was: Re: Ambix files)

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 'stand

Re: [Sursound] Ambix files

On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 10:12:31AM +0100, Paul Hodges wrote: > What is the best document to provide to a programmer who needs to work > with Ambix audio files (reading and writing)? Depends on if you want to support the 'extended format' or not. I've never seen any file using it in the wild. 1.

Re: [Sursound] binaural to FOA?

On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 02:15:12PM +, Augustine Leudar wrote: > http://www.ambisonic.net/ambimix.html Or 'how to do FOA on a stereo mixer' 38 years ago... Amusing but pretty irrelevant today. Some simple facts: Horizontal FOA requires three _independent_ signals, W, X, Y. Binaural only pro

Re: [Sursound] ORTF-3D With Higher-order Ambisonics

On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 03:06:15PM -0400, moskowitz wrote: > My conclusion from experimenting with Harpex to generate spaced > arrays - based on comparing it to an array of mono mics - is that > Harpex's plane wave decomposition function isn't quite ready for > prime time. Indeed it isn't. What t

Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 04:42:28PM +0100, Jack Reynolds wrote: > I have had great results with a pair of spaced first order ambisonic mics > for binaural decoding. > Taking the left hemisphere of one of the mics, and right hemisphere of the > other How do you obtain only one hemisphere from a

Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:38:49PM +0100, Steven Boardman wrote: > I had an Ambeo and got rid of it for this reason. The A/B processing provided by Sennheiser sucks. It gets a lot better with a proper A/B processor computed from actual measurements. Ciao, -- FA _

Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 12:36:38PM +0100, jack reynolds wrote: > The only problem with using ambisonics mics is the high frequency limit > above which they stop working properly. A second order ambi mic reduces > this problem, but above about 7Khz the not quite coincident capsules > becomes a prob

Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 02:37:39PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote: > So if you > had say, 8 ambisonics mics pointed in 8 different directions ,in order to > record that small 8th of a sphere (or in this case cube) in the direction > they are pointed in (which is what the ORTF does) - how would th

Re: [Sursound] Suitable headphones for monitoring binaural compositions

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 11:12:38PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote: > I normally do installation work but lockdown has steered me towards working > on binaural work that can be streamed. Obviously, with speakers, I have a > calibrated system, room treatment etc > I have a pair of Sennheiser HD600s

Re: [Sursound] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)

On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 09:06:19AM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > Fons created Zita-njbridge to build a multi-channel networked system; > according to the description: > > " Zita-njbridge can be used for a one-to-one connection (using UDP) or in a > one-to-many system (usin

Re: [Sursound] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 09:32:02PM +0100, Paul Hodges wrote: > My concern with > wi-fi latency when multiple links are required to multiple speakers > would be that the latency will not be consistent between channels. > Although buffering will keep the data flow going, there is no way to > ensure

Re: [Sursound] wifi audio (was Re: Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.)

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 05:55:49PM +0200, Wim wrote: > The major problem with wireless lays in the re-authentication that occurs > after a preset period. That takes up to several hundred millisecs. That's one problem. Another one is that you won't be alone on the channel. A quick scan here (Muni

Re: [Sursound] Deconstructing soundbar marketing B.S.

On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 02:44:28PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote: > /beginrant : According to the article below soundbars work not as any kind > of knockoff WFS but by "bouncing" sound off the walls tro get it to appear > to be behind you. How can it be that this actually sells and is endorrsed >

Re: [Sursound] Looking for virtual mic equations for 2nd order

Hello Hector, > As quoted below, some time ago Fons kindly provided the equations to > extract virtual microphone signals from an ambisonic 1st order soundfield. > I was wondering, is there a set of available and known formulas to extract > virtual microphones from 2nd order record

Re: [Sursound] 2nd order A-format to B-format equations

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 09:59:45PM +, Martin Dupras wrote: > However, no one has answered my question. I will ask again. > > Can someone point me to any published resources that explain the principles > and theoretical equations required to in theory convert from 2nd order > A-format to B-for

Re: [Sursound] 2nd order A-format to B-format equations

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 04:50:06AM +0800, Stephen McArdle wrote: > I think the question might be more simpler than this. > For 1st order (with 4 microphones) the very first A to B > equations are (for example): > W' = FLU+FRD+BLD+BRU > X' = FLU+FRD-BLD-BRU > Y' = FLU-FRD+BLD-BRU > Z' = FLU-FRD-BL

Re: [Sursound] 2nd order A-format to B-format equations

will include the highpass filters as well as some LF EQ. > On Linux, my tools of choice are Fons' aliki to measure IRs and edit them > for convolution, and jconvolver to apply them in a very efficient way. The > joy is that you would be reverse-engineering Fons' octoproc (which m

Re: [Sursound] Hardest wearing outdoor speakers

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 10:41:13AM +, Augustine Leudar wrote: > If you needed speakers for a permanent outdoor installation with speakers > than need to last decades - does such a thing exist ? Any recommendations ? > What about media players ? If things have to last outdoors for longer than

Re: [Sursound] Octomic Impulses Up North

On Sun, Sep 16, 2018 at 12:18:54PM -0600, Jonathan Kawchuk wrote: > I'm also curious if anyone has experimented with running an inverse EQ > calibration curve for your your sweep speakers in order to compensate for > inherent peaks and valleys in the speaker’s frequency response during > impulse

Re: [Sursound] Zoom limiters

On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 09:16:44PM +0100, Steven Boardman wrote: > I have a h4n, h2n, and f8, but have used them all. > It really does work like i said, and is effective at higher bit rates. > There's quite a few tests online, and quite a few misplaced negatively from > sound devices owners, that

Re: [Sursound] tetrahedral mic record

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 09:27:16AM -0500, David McGriffy wrote: > Of course, the > calibration filters for tetrahedral mics attempt to correct for this > effect, but those filters more closely match the diffuse field average of > all directions than the more extreme results in the direction of one

Re: [Sursound] MEMS SNR Specifications

On Sat, Aug 18, 2018 at 09:41:13AM +0200, 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. Mayb

Re: [Sursound] octofile release

On Sun, Jul 29, 2018 at 01:46:04PM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > Easy to compile, support for FLAC, GPL3 license... FLAC is supported for input only. The output is 9 channels, and FLAC can't handle that. Never understood why they put in that silly limit... Ciao, -- FA ___

[Sursound] octofile release

Hello all, Source code for octofile version 0.3.0 (linux) is now available at Octofile is the A to B format converter for Core Sound's Octomic. A-format input can be 1,2,4 or 8 audio file(s) with resp. 8,4,2 or 1 channel(s) ea

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Strange 'buzz' in Ambisonic recording

On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 02:43:06AM +0100, Gerard Lardner wrote: > The stereo file exhibits the buzzing sound right from the start of the music. See . This shows 1 samples of the left channel, differentiated twice. Ciao, -- FA

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Strange 'buzz' in Ambisonic recording

On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 12:35:56AM +0100, Gerard Lardner wrote: > I have tried encoding using VVEncode and using X-Volver (in Reaper). The > effect is there in either case, though it is less obvious when using > X-Volver. However, I do not hear it at all if I listen to the files through > the stan

Re: [Sursound] [allowed] Re: Strange 'buzz' in Ambisonic recording

On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 01:03:57AM +0100, Gerard Lardner wrote: > Actually really only when the organ is playing; the brass is usually with > the organ, but not always. The buzz is present when the organ is playing > loudly. Could you make available a small part (20 seconds or so) of the origina

Re: [Sursound] RIR measuring, how to capture a higher order Ambisonic room responce?

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 07:05:37PM -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > So I bought a robotic arm. Len (from Core Sound) asked off-list about it, so > I'm including some information here. I got the WidowXL from Trossen > Robotics. Anything better (as far as I could find, not an expert!) would >

Re: [Sursound] RIR measuring, how to capture a higher order Ambisonic room responce?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 01:10:56PM -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > You would need to "calibrate" the created 8 capsule array. That is, record > impulse responses all around it in a big space or anechoic room (enough to > accurately sample the spherical harmonics you want), and then derive

Re: [Sursound] RIR measuring, how to capture a higher order Ambisonic room responce?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 07:18:33PM +0100, jack reynolds wrote: > indeed. apologies, it is 90 degrees. Again no. To cover all the directions of the Octomic capsules with a Tetramic you need 4 orientations of the Tetramic (and you get another 8 directions as a bonus). Ciao, -- FA _

Re: [Sursound] RIR measuring, how to capture a higher order Ambisonic room responce?

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 12:24:47PM +0100, jack reynolds wrote: > The new coresound octomic is based on two tetramics, with one rotated 45 > degrees from the other This is simply not true. Ciao, -- FA ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu

Re: [Sursound] Upcoming update to AmbiExplorer

On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 06:51:50PM +, Hector Centeno wrote: > It all depends > on the source code of the OctoMic version (octofile and octoproc) not > having any licensing restrictions. Fons mentioned that the software's > source will be available only to OctoMic buyers s

Re: [Sursound] Ambix to FuMa conversion

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 05:28:57PM +0200, David Pickett wrote: > Thanks, Fons. I was hoping it was something as simple as this. I failed to > find anything on the internet that expresses the relationships so simply. > Did I actually miss a page? Not one I know of. Some of my prog

Re: [Sursound] Steinberg and Multichannel files

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 05:42:11PM +0200, David Pickett wrote: > Incidentally, one of the drawbacks of multichannel wavfiles for HOA is their > large size for any reasonable length of musical composition. At 48kHz, a > 9-channel 2nd order file takes c. 74MB for 1 minute of music. Alternatively, >

Re: [Sursound] Curious

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 01:20:17PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote: > I don't know if anyone else will get the same effect - but playing this > album on my laptop speakers : > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8wUKUBAXMk > > The sound seems to be hovering about several inches to the left of my > l

Re: [Sursound] Rode Soundfield NT-SF1

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:49:07AM +0100, Chris Woolf wrote: > 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. This has little to do with response, and all with directivity.

Re: [Sursound] Ambix to FuMa conversion

On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 09:55:25AM +0100, Jack Reynolds wrote: > FuMa is WXYZ and ambiX is WYZX with SN3D normalisation. > I forget the gains off the top of my head, but will have > a look and get back if no one else has chipped in. Convert FuMa to Ambix - ACN-0 = 1.4142

Re: [Sursound] Rode Soundfield NT-SF1

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:12:48AM +0100, Paul Hodges wrote: > --On 12 April 2018 09:36 +0100 Jack Reynolds > wrote: > > > There is an optimum radius of about 15mm, below which the bottom end > > begins to suffer I'm told. > > I would guess this is practical rather than theoretical; determined

Re: [Sursound] Zoom H2N - thoughts? (octa)

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:13:17AM -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > I actually should go back to my original approach (more complicated) for 1st > order, which was to derive a 4x4 matrix of filters (which would be 8x8 for > the 2nd order mic). Not necessarily a good idea. The problem with

Re: [Sursound] Anyone in Munich?

On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:05:31AM +0200, Oddity Medium wrote: > Hello, this summer I will do a show at the Kunstverein Munich (here are > pictures for a sense of scale > ) > and am planning on ambiso

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Announces OctoMic - First 2nd-orderAmbisonics Microphone

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 12:58:08PM -0700, Eric Benjamin wrote: > I’d like to point out that I am the inventor of the second order microphone > array called by Core-Sound the Octomic. I published the design six years > ago at the 133rd AES Convention in preprint 8728. That is absolutely true. That

Re: [Sursound] Core Sound Announces OctoMic - First 2nd-order Ambisonics Microphone

On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 09:08:54PM +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: > Sweet! A resounding "me too" to Stefan's question about the matrix, since > you're one channel short :) > Looking at the geometry, I guess you sacrificed the second-order > rotationally symmetric component (FuMa R or ACN 08), w

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >