http://smyth-research.com/
We had this discussion before, at least I have some strange déjà vu
feeling here... :-)
Best,
Stefan Schreiber
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On 1 Nov
AMEN... +1
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
On Behalf Of Fons Adriaensen
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 4:02 PM
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:18:46PM +, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Basically, stereo intrinsically features cross-talk; listening
> over headphones removes this.
> So putting it back in, via some kind of Blumlein shuffling, fixes
> that. if you want externalisation, you need some room effect
> (arti
] On Behalf
Of Ronald C.F. Antony [r...@cubiculum.com]
Sent: 02 November 2012 16:51
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On 1 Nov 2012, at 23:07, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> The next and valid question is if stereo via headphones
--On 02 November 2012 12:34 -0400 "Ronald C.F. Antony"
wrote:
Remember, the WWW was invented on the NeXT, and it was invented only,
because OOP gave TBL enough leverage to write a web server and client in
reasonably short time.
The original program that TBL developed into the web was written
On 1 Nov 2012, at 23:07, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> The next and valid question is if stereo via headphones actually works so
> well at all... (Many people have problems, such as in-head effects, lack of
> perceived "real space", etc.)
>
> If you would fix these problems, then you could probab
On 1 Nov 2012, at 22:47, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
>> You're angry at reality. I'm not making these things up, nor do they
>> constitute my ideal world. But I'm willing to face the reality and ask which
>> small steps can we take to get from here to there by infiltra
On 1 Nov 2012, at 22:30, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
>
>>
>> Object Oriented programming was available 1978/1980. It wasn't used until
>> NeXT started pushing ObjC and SUN tried to rip it off unsuccessfully with
>> Java (which barely qualifies because for several iter
Hi
On 2 November 2012 03:54, Alexis Shaw wrote:
> For HRTF based sound, headphones work the best. The HRTF is the solution of
> the in-head effects.
>
Actually, you simply can't guarantee that. To even get close to
guaranteeing that it will work for the majority head tracking is
essential, espec
On 1 Nov 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Download the binaural for binaural use, and the stereo for stereo use? - in
> fact, instead of trying to make one format fit all - people could just
> download a folder and extract the ones they needed...
That's an academic solution. That's like
On 31 Oct 2012, at 12:38, Martin Leese wrote:
> Peter Lennox wrote:
>
>> Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
>> skip the uhj altogether?
>
> Please, what is this "generic binaural"?
Generic binaural is the equivalent of a dummy head microphone recording,
+1
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
On Behalf Of Paul Hodges
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 1:37 AM
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
--On 02 November 2012
On 1 Nov 2012, at 17:00, sursound-requ...@music.vt.edu wrote:
i am wondering if we cannot produce HRTFs the way the first
produced spectacle lenses. one needs to look at the range of
variations in HRTFs and what actually varies from person to person
and produce a dozen or so hrtfs. people
--On 02 November 2012 02:30 + Stefan Schreiber
wrote:
- Windows NT is partially based on C++.
I don't see "based on" - "written in" is not the same. NT was a rename of
OS/2 v3, the version being re-engineered for cross-machine compatibility by
MS (while IBM were making v2); hence the
For HRTF based sound, headphones work the best. The HRTF is the solution of
the in-head effects.
On 2 November 2012 14:07, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Richard Dobson wrote:
>
> The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear
>> stereo as stereo. If the response to "lack of pe
Richard Dobson wrote:
The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear
stereo as stereo. If the response to "lack of perfection" is always
"do nothing", nothing will be done. Alternatively, if you use those
generic HRTFs, at least ~some~ people will be happy.
BTW, the AES
Peter Lennox wrote:
Download the binaural for binaural use, and the stereo for stereo use? - in
fact, instead of trying to make one format fit all - people could just download
a folder and extract the ones they needed...
Dr. Peter Lennox
I already wrote this. Of course, you put this into
Peter Lennox wrote:
Am I missing something? - for mobile use, wouldn't B-format to binaural be
better than UHJ?
Dr Peter Lennox
Yes, but then you didn't need a solution requiring the participation of
mighty Apple... ;-)
Best,
Stefan
__
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:56, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Oh yes, go to Apple and look if they listen to your ideas, and let others do their stuff instead of doing
some promotion for some "stylish", "fahionable" campany offering "super slim"
products.
You make my
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
Object Oriented programming was available 1978/1980. It wasn't used until NeXT
started pushing ObjC and SUN tried to rip it off unsuccessfully with Java
(which barely qualifies because for several iterations of the language it
missed key elements of a real OOP langu
umashankar manthravadi wrote:
> i am wondering if we cannot produce HRTFs the way the first produced
> spectacle lenses. one needs to look at the range of variations in HRTFs and
> what actually varies from person to person and produce a dozen or so hrtfs.
> people can just try them and stick with
+1 AMEN...
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
On Behalf Of Peter Lennox
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 3:25 AM
To: 'Surround Sound discussion group'
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
Sent from my mobile phone
On 31 Oct 2012, at 07:08, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
> skip the uhj altogether?
Because you also want to listen to the same piece on you
ic.vt.edu
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
>
>
> This is absolutely true. My late first wife
> heard stereo as two separate speakers no
> matter how well the speakers worked for others.
> She liked mono a lot better.
> Surround sound wa
Sent from my mobile phone
On 31 Oct 2012, at 07:08, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
> skip the uhj altogether?
Because you also want to listen to the same piece on your home and car stereo?
Ronald
-- next part ---
> If the response to "lack of perfection" is always "do nothing",
> nothing will be done.
Which perfectly explains why we don't have an accepted ambisonic file
format. No one is willing to accept limitations... and it is so easy
to find limitations in formats.
I firmly believe that a successful a
This is absolutely true. My late first wife
heard stereo as two separate speakers no
matter how well the speakers worked for others.
She liked mono a lot better.
Surround sound was a n ightmare from her viewpoint--
all those speakers playing from different directions
each on heard individually.
The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear
stereo as stereo. If the response to "lack of perfection" is always "do
nothing", nothing will be done. Alternatively, if you use those generic
HRTFs, at least ~some~ people will be happy.
BTW, the AES has just announced a pr
Peter Lennox wrote:
> Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
> skip the uhj altogether?
Please, what is this "generic binaural"?
Everyone has an individual HRTF. If you
release binaural recording using a generic
HRTF then it will work for some and not for
oth
...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On
Behalf Of Ronald C.F. Antony
Sent: 30 October 2012 18:14
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On 30 Oct 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Am I missing something? -
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:56, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Oh yes, go to Apple and look if they listen to your ideas, and let others do
> their stuff instead of doing some promotion for some "stylish", "fahionable"
> campany offering "super slim" products.
You make my point: they won't listen, at le
On 30 Oct 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox wrote:
> Am I missing something? - for mobile use, wouldn't B-format to binaural be
> better than UHJ?
> Dr Peter Lennox
Of course it would. Do you know of a mobile playback device with multi-channel
audio support, multi-channel audio market place, and a
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:42, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
> Ronald, most if not all (classical) recordings where I am participating are
> done in a way that they could be issued in 5.1 (or say 5.0) surround, namely
> several Pentatone recordings, and even the more recent television/radio stuff.
>
>
Richard Lee wrote:
Take your favourite Nimbus UHJ CD and
rip it using the most evil MP3 encoder you can find
Sorry, slightly off-topic, but still:
Some people have done terrible data reduction to UHJ recordings already:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnvRtM5WDsc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=
From: Richard Lee
To: 'Surround Sound discussion group'
Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2012, 19:51
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
> Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression messe
ic.vt.edu] On
> Behalf Of Richard Lee [rica...@justnet.com.au]
> Sent: 30 October 2012 19:51
> To: 'Surround Sound discussion group'
> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
>
> > Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression
&
-boun...@music.vt.edu [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf
Of Richard Lee [rica...@justnet.com.au]
Sent: 30 October 2012 19:51
To: 'Surround Sound discussion group'
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
> Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked
> Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression messes up
> phase relationships, and that would be an issue for things like UHJ, which as
> long as portable stereo players with limited battery life (and thus limited
> CPUs), is the only viable, because stereo compatible, dis
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:47, etienne deleflie wrote:
At this point in time, not only is most music listened on mobile devices, most
music is even purchased on mobile devices, and that's strictly a stereo (or
maybe binaural) world.
With a custom iPhone/Andro
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the re-surrection of UHJ. Simple 2 channels
will remain the most important distribution format in the forseable future.
This is real surround sound? Why not Dolby Surround
On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:47, etienne deleflie wrote:
>> At this point in time, not only is most music listened on mobile devices,
>> most music is even purchased on mobile devices, and that's strictly a stereo
>> (or maybe binaural) world.
>
> With a custom iPhone/Android app that employs headtr
> At this point in time, not only is most music listened on mobile devices,
> most music is even purchased on mobile devices, and that's strictly a stereo
> (or maybe binaural) world.
With a custom iPhone/Android app that employs headtracking (+
headsets) on iPhone/Android devices ... you have a
Here! Here! (Goes back under stone. Now, where's my old Minim and my relatively
uncompressed CD's?)
On 29 Oct 2012, at 14:28, "Ronald C.F. Antony" wrote:
>
> On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
>
>>> When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the re-surrection of UHJ. Simple 2
>>> chan
On 28 Oct 2012, at 03:11, Richard Lee wrote:
> This will be a lossy compressed format probably based on the public domain
> Vorbis.
Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression messes up
phase relationships, and that would be an issue for things like UHJ, which as
long
On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
>> When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the re-surrection of UHJ. Simple 2
>> channels will remain the most important distribution format in the forseable
>> future.
>
> This is real surround sound? Why not Dolby Surround...:-D
Despite a lot
--On 28 October 2012 20:00 -0700 Robert Greene wrote:
I think compressed surround stuff is a nonstarter
in the real world. You would be looking for
a person who cared a lot about surround but
did not give a darn about sound quality. I doubt
that there are many such!
DTS is still by far the ea
> I think no serious person in audio wants anything to do
> with lossy compression which is a commercial compromise
> for no real reason(uncompressed audio no longer
> looks like that big a file). Since probably
> no one is interested in exotic surround items
> except people who are serious about a
I think no serious person in audio wants anything to do
with lossy compression which is a commercial compromise
for no real reason(uncompressed audio no longer
looks like that big a file). Since probably
no one is interested in exotic surround items
except people who are serious about audio,
I th
Richard Lee wrote:
As I've said ad nauseum, the guy who first integrates an Ambi decoder into VLC,
getting around the evil Windoz mixer etc. gets to choose the data structure for
next important Ambi format.
This will be a lossy compressed format probably based on the public domain
Vorbis.
On 28/10/2012 23:12, etienne deleflie wrote:
Hi Richard,
..
The 4GB limit has been considered within UA.
The wavpack format itself has the limit of 2^32 samples, which
translates to 27 hours at 44 kHz (or 1 hour of 27 channels at 44kHz).
The users who have been emailing me are all working at
Hi Richard,
> Yes, what it does, it does very well. However, as described, you are asked
> to first create an n-channel interleaved WAVE file containing all those
> uncompressed silent channels, and pass that to wavpack. Which is fine in
> principle, except that with a possibly large number of cha
On 27/10/2012 23:27, etienne deleflie wrote:
..
I really didn't want to get pulled into a defence or argument about
ambisonic formats ... but, just to clarify ... the choice to include
some empty channels in UA is intentionally designed so that authoring
environments don't need to change all the
I suspect that
- any file format that has any level of sophistication (read:
complexity) will likely not get take-up (maybe even UA is too complex.
Straight old B-format is fine). Its not what features are included
that counts that's the engineer's mistake.
- any file format which can't relati
Hi Richard,
> Now the attention in previous posts was very much on the phrase "most
> sophisticated format", which was guaranteed to wind people up; whereas the
> key word is really "available". The UA format is not really available to
> ~composers~ to use. The description is very much one for pr
Please not! He who is happy with lossy compression is hardly a candidate to
have a properly set up surround system, much less one suitable to Ambisonics.
Lossless compression is OK, even desired, as an option, preferably something
that's freely licensed and enjoys commercial support e.g. ALAC
S
As I've said ad nauseum, the guy who first integrates an Ambi decoder into VLC,
getting around the evil Windoz mixer etc. gets to choose the data structure for
next important Ambi format.
This will be a lossy compressed format probably based on the public domain
Vorbis.
Ambisonia was the 1st m
I received a message back from Jan-Mark Batke, to the effect they will
pass my comments on to the patent authorities. It is classified at this
stage as a "disclosure". The four inventors are members of Technicolor,
and the new system is briefly featured here:
http://community.calrec.com/?p=82
> So is this, in fact, the ultimate file format that folk on this list have
> been arguing for (and over) for so long?
I dont know about "ultimate" formats ... but one existing format is
Universal Ambisonic (UA). It is documented Here:
http://soundofspace.com/static/make_ua_file
And there is lots
Richard Dobson wrote:
...
> So is this, in fact, the ultimate file format that folk on this list
> have been arguing for (and over) for so long?
No, absolutely not. The fact that it has been
patented means that it should not be used.
The situation is similar the the GIF image file
format. When
Hi,
Richard Dobson wrote:
I guess I haven't played the system well enough - as the person who
first published the amb format (not in 2009 but in 2000, in my paper
for
ICMC Berlin) it would have been a nice addition to my meagre CV to
have
been mentioned in a patent application. Perhaps I shou
On 24 Oct 2012, at 06:56, Richard Dobson wrote:
> Interesting (in its way), looks like a combo of HOA Ambisonic scene
> description (using multiple HOA streams possibly of different orders) and
> bandwidth compression;
A real scene description would describe the space, the sound sources, and t
Hmm, well, that rather proves my point, and I will write to them. I have
every confidence that that sentence was written ironically rather than
hagiographically. Suffice it to say, I, Richard Dobson, did that work in
2000; and it appears the title to even that very modest piece of IP
(embodied
>
> "The B-Format (based on the extensible ^iff/wav' structure) with its
> *.amb file format realisation as described as of 30 March 2009 for
> example in Martin Leese, "File Format for B-Format ", http://www.
> ambisonia.com/Members/etienne/Members/mleese/file-format-for-b-format,
> is the most s
Interesting (in its way), looks like a combo of HOA Ambisonic scene
description (using multiple HOA streams possibly of different orders)
and bandwidth compression; i.e. there is an encoding and decoding device
as part of the application, as there would need to be, given that
patents ultimately
> Hi
>
> On 24 October 2012 09:37, Michael Chapman wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Just noticed this the other day:
>>>
>>> WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
>>>
>
>
>> Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
>
> Well it's Thomson and the inventors include people like Johann-Markus
>
Hi
On 24 October 2012 09:37, Michael Chapman wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just noticed this the other day:
>>
>> WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
>>
> Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
Well it's Thomson and the inventors include people like Johann-Markus
Batke and others w
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed this the other day:
>
> WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
>
> http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012059385
>
> I haven't read all the 75 pages, mostly looking at the pictures :-)
Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
> But it
Hi,
Just noticed this the other day:
WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012059385
I haven't read all the 75 pages, mostly looking at the pictures :-)
But it looks like it's about combining different stream
68 matches
Mail list logo
