Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

s.noister...@ircam.fr> Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2016 7:02 PM To: Surround Sound discussion group<mailto:sursound@music.vt.edu> Subject: Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set? Dear All, I would like to add a few words to the discussion on the AES69-2015 / SOFA

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

> On 25 Jan 2016, at 01:37, Marc Lavallée wrote: > >> As anything simpler but functional might be sufficient and even >> preferable in most cases: >> >> - Does ATK define an HRTF interface which is sufficiently flexible to >> be the base for a real < standard > ? > > Not

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Dear All, I would like to add a few words to the discussion on the AES69-2015 / SOFA format: AES69 standardizes the SOFA file format to exchange space-related acoustic data. The format is designed to be sufficiently flexible to include source materials from different databases and for

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Trond Lossius wrote: On 25 Jan 2016, at 01:37, Marc Lavallée wrote: As anything simpler but functional might be sufficient and even preferable in most cases: - Does ATK define an HRTF interface which is sufficiently flexible to be the base for a real < standard > ?

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Hello Stefan, On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > >> Two questions: > > 1. Doesn't ATK support binaural HOA decoders? > > 2. < 8 > impulses (for 4 virtual speakers) implies that you don't support > 3D decoders (?). If not, why this? (Immersive/3D

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

the design of synthesized HRTFs ? umashankar Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Bo-Erik Sandholm<mailto:bosses...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2016 5:15 PM To: sursound<mailto:sursound@music.vt.edu> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Ho

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

We can definitely re-learn/reprogram our perception of stimulus, as long as there are other cues to back it up. This has been proven via glasses that alter the orientation of the visual field. After a while the brain adapts, and presents this as normal. I think that once learn your brain can

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

At this stage, one has to wonder just how much need there really is for matching HRTF's. I'm not so convinced these dys as I once was, at least if headtracking is properly implemented, the few "fixed" parameters are matched (like inter-ear distances) and there are good visual cues as there are in

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

At 13:40 25-01-16, Chris wrote: 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

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

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Chris makes some very good points, ones that I wish I'd made myself! We must be continuously recalibrating our hearing to be able to deal with all the effects Chris mentions otherwise the conflict between the physical sense of hearing and our internal perceptual models would become too excessive.

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Me too. Personally if all the HRTF databases contained all this individual data, i.e head width, height, ear distance from shoulders, and a picture of the pinnae. One could select the nearest to ones own, or have a system that throws up a few to chose. Listen for 24hours then done… Steve

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Does recording with in ear mics work for you? Have you tried listening for a long time with closed eyes of in the dark? Stereo listening is known to work better in the dark when the sight does not interfere with the soundscape. On 25 Jan 2016 15:11, "David Pickett" wrote: > At

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Current consumer grade VR systems are technically imperfect; we can see the pixels, there's lens aberrations and color distorsions, the field of view is limited, etc. Paired with imperfect headphones to listen to imperfect HRTF rendered content, the experience should be good enough, because it is

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set? Chris makes some very good points, ones that I wish I'd made myself! We must be continuously recalibrating our hearing to be able to deal with all the effects Chris mentions otherwise the conflict between the physical sense

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

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

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

At 15:55 25-01-16, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: >Does recording with in ear mics work for you? Binaural with headphones never really works for me, though sometimes fig 8 Bumlein stuff does on ambient noises; but I had an experience with in-ear mics once -- c. 1990. The mics were in somebody

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Brian FG Katz [brian.k...@limsi.fr] Sent: 25 January 2016 16:45 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set? Dear list, On the topic o

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

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Dave Malham wrote: At this stage, one has to wonder just how much need there really is for matching HRTF's. I'm not so convinced these dys as I once was, at least if headtracking is properly implemented, the few "fixed" parameters are matched (like inter-ear distances) and there are good

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Marc Lavallée wrote: Current consumer grade VR systems are technically imperfect; we can see the pixels, there's lens aberrations and color distorsions, the field of view is limited, etc. Paired with imperfect headphones to listen to imperfect HRTF rendered content, the experience should be

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Hi All, Just an echo... the ATK web page is down at the moment. (Has been since before Christmas. Argh!) The problem appears to be something just a bit more than 'trivial'. We're working on it, and hopefully will have the site live soon. Apologies to everyone for the inconvenience! My kind

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

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

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Augustine Leudar wrote: As far as I know the Kemar head is the average human head shape taken from thousands of measurments - http://kemar.us/ Im not quite sure why an HRTF from a Kemar head would be less desirable than averaging of 50 seperate head measurements in real human head. I dont

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Marc Lavallée wrote: Formats like 5.1 to 22.2 are application specific, so I think they should not be part of a standard. No, but any 5.1 to binaural decoder (application, as you say) would have to use some HRTF data brought into some specific shape/format. You would have to match

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

As far as I know the Kemar head is the average human head shape taken from thousands of measurments - http://kemar.us/ Im not quite sure why an HRTF from a Kemar head would be less desirable than averaging of 50 seperate head measurements in real human head. I dont know how well Kemar averages

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 23:57:37 +, Stefan Schreiber wrote : > Marc, just some idea: > > If the ATK includes different HRTF sets, doesn't it already provide > an open interface/standard for exchangeable HRTF data? ATK provides HRTF data as wav files, ready to be used

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

On Mon, 25 Jan 2016 01:04:30 +, Stefan Schreiber wrote : > >ATK provides HRTF data as wav files, ready to be used with > >convolvers. It a "ready to use" application specific format. > > > In which (angular) resolution, etc.? Azimuth/elevation resolution? The wav

[Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

http://www.blueripplesound.com/hrtf-amber The IRCAM AKG "Listen" HRTF data contains measured HRTFs from about 50 different people - this must have taken a lot of effort and we're very grateful to the good folk of IRCAM for doing the work and making the results available to the world! What

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Le Sun, 24 Jan 2016 16:35:03 -0500,I wrote: > There could be a way to find a "best match" from sets of measured > heads, maybe using 3D scanning, or with simple measurements. For > example, the spherical HRTF model have different diameters, which is a > good start. > > There's a paper on "Rapid

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

In reply to your original question - I believe there are available data sets for Kemar head measurements - not quite what you asking for but it is supposed to be an "average" head http://sound.media.mit.edu/resources/KEMAR.html On 24 January 2016 at 20:19, Augustine Leudar

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Augustine Leudar wrote: In reply to your original question - I believe there are available data sets for Kemar head measurements - not quite what you asking for but it is supposed to be an "average" head http://sound.media.mit.edu/resources/KEMAR.html I was aware of the fact that dummy head

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:00:37 +, Stefan Schreiber wrote : > Should we "normalize" anthropometric data or (measured) HRTF data > sets? That would discriminate potential users at the sides of the normal curve... There could be a way to find a "best match" from sets of

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

I have idea of how hrtfs could be individually measured and could work on a commercial scale with minimum inconvenience to the public (so they might actually use it ). Not sure who to talk to about htis though. On 24 January 2016 at 19:31, Stefan Schreiber wrote: >

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Marc Lavallée wrote: The LISTEN set from IRCAM, the KEMAR set from MIT and the spherical set by R. Duda are included in the Ambisonic Toolkit. I use them on http://ambisonic.xyz/ . The spherical set is probably a good enough compromise for VR applications, because perfection is not required for

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Marc Lavallée wrote: On Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:00:37 +, Stefan Schreiber wrote : Should we "normalize" anthropometric data or (measured) HRTF data sets? That would discriminate potential users at the sides of the normal curve... There could be a way to find

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

You are right, the SOFA effort is important. Here I see that many more data sets are available now: http://www.sofaconventions.org/mediawiki/index.php/Files I suspect that there will be many different solutions based of the available sets. I don't think there could be a "universal" or optimal

Re: [Sursound] How to derive a good "universal" HRTF data set?

Marc Lavallée wrote: The LISTEN set from IRCAM, the KEMAR set from MIT and the spherical set by R. Duda are included in the Ambisonic Toolkit. I use them on http://ambisonic.xyz/ . The spherical set is probably a good enough compromise for VR applications, because perfection is not required for