Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Dear colleagues... I take the opportunity to inform you about recent work at the MPEG, presenting updates and (by documents backed) official information. 1. http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2013/01.aspx#.UQVoNVK-Zkj ITU-T’s Study Group 16

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

I am apologizing for the HTML --> "plain text msg." formatting errors, I never seem to learn this. MPEG Surround was also defined as one of the MPEG-4 Audio Object Types in 2007.[8]

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Hi ... Here some expert view on the "technical background", presented by some company in this area: http://www.atsc.org/cms/pdf/pt2/07-Jean-Marc_Jot_3D_Audio.pdf "Current state of the art". Look for example to p. 6, "perceptual attributes that characterize natural, 3D-audio". (and especia

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 03:21:46PM +0100, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote: > How so? FLAC has a different design objective than some of the commercial > lossless codecs. > FLAC was intended mostly for "rippers", i.e. people who want to encode a lot > of CDs, and store them and play them back on comput

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

On 23 Jan 2013, at 02:53, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > P.S.: FLAC was the first widely used codec for lossless compression, so here > the commercial competition has a problem. How so? FLAC has a different design objective than some of the commercial lossless codecs. FLAC was intended mostly for

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan Schreiber wrote: Marc Lavallée wrote: Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial standards using lots of patents. How Ambisonics can co-exist? -- Marc citing my 1st posting: Dear colleagues... I would like to remember everybody interested or alrea

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Marc Lavallée wrote: Stefan, I was not stating that MPEG and ISO are evil. As a hobbyist, my question is: how Ambisonics might be included in a standard format made by the industry for the industry, that "everybody" would then have to use if there are no viable (and simple) alternative appart fr

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan, I was not stating that MPEG and ISO are evil. As a hobbyist, my question is: how Ambisonics might be included in a standard format made by the industry for the industry, that "everybody" would then have to use if there are no viable (and simple) alternative appart from the AMB format. I ca

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

> ... >> Don't write about supposed patent trolls if your sources are "Forbes" >> etc. (This is business press, they certainly don't have any real clue >> about patents.) > > The article was written by the CEO of Article > One Partners; she knows what she is talking > about. > If self-(corporate)-

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Ok, the citings and links weren't presented in the desired form. I guess this is because there was no clear ISO standard for HTML citings...(In fact, maybe this is because I was copying HTML to plain text format, forced by the sursound list owners to do so. :-) ) Anyway, I am completely

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Marc Lavallée wrote: Remember that MPEG is creating proprietary, industrial and commercial standards using lots of patents. How Ambisonics can co-exist? -- Marc The MPEG is part of the International Standard Organisation (ISO), in fact it was founded by both ISO and IEC. http://en.wiki

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan Schreiber a écrit : > >As for Java, it is now a free software and its > >implementation for Android (Dalvik), is free too. > > > Really?! Java is not free, unless you are referring (only) to the > programming language. (Libraries? VM?) Hi Stephan. The Java language and its specificati

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan Schreiber wrote: ... > Don't write about supposed patent trolls if your sources are "Forbes" > etc. (This is business press, they certainly don't have any real clue > about patents.) The article was written by the CEO of Article One Partners; she knows what she is talking about. ... >>..."

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Marc Lavallée wrote: Stefan Schreiber a écrit : The Android OS is "open", although not entirely: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29#Licensing Very closely controlled by Google, even if being based on Linux and some (propietary) hack of Java? Yes, de

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan Schreiber a écrit : > >The Android OS is "open", although not entirely: > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29#Licensing > > > > Very closely controlled by Google, even if being based on Linux and > some (propietary) hack of Java? Yes, developed and controlled b

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Dave Malham wrote: Hi Stefan, I doubt if B+ would meet the currently perceived needs of cinema surround mixers/producers since it does not have the ability to go "discrete". B++ might be enough - that's first order + 5.1 (I just made that up :-)). A better option would be at least third orde

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Marc Lavallée wrote: Stefan Schreiber a écrit : If it < doesn't > cost to include AVC and AAC into web browsers/plugins etc., maybe it is/was about Open Source principles? (Any discussion leads to nothing, because I tend to see this in a pragmatic way. For others it is about "open lifesty

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Stefan Schreiber a écrit : > If it < doesn't > cost to include AVC and AAC into web > browsers/plugins etc., maybe it is/was about Open Source principles? > (Any discussion leads to nothing, because I tend to see this in a > pragmatic way. For others it is about "open lifestyle". The same > peop

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: This is a typical FUD approach presentend by the competition. If I have anything to say about, I'd say that any Ambisonis based approach would be "patent-light", iof not patent-free. You confirm precisely

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: This is a typical FUD approach presentend by the competition. If I have anything to say about, I'd say that any Ambisonis based approach would be "patent-light", iof not patent-free. You confirm precisely

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

From: Gregory Maxwell To: Surround Sound discussion group Sent: Monday, 21 January 2013 10:51 AM Subject: Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style... On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > T

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > This is a typical FUD approach presentend by the competition. > If I have anything to say about, I'd say that any Ambisonis based approach > would be "patent-light", iof not patent-free. You confirm precisely the concern I raised: The res

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Gregory Maxwell wrote: On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: Dear colleagues... I would like to remember everybody interested or already being involved that ITU/MPEG plan to define and issue some 3D audio standard (better: 3D audio standard framework) during this year. Th

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote: > Dear colleagues... > > I would like to remember everybody interested or already being involved that > ITU/MPEG plan to define and issue some 3D audio standard (better: 3D audio > standard framework) during this year. The 3D audio codec is m

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Dave Malham wrote: Hi Stefan, I doubt if B+ would meet the currently perceived needs of cinema surround mixers/producers since it does not have the ability to go "discrete". B++ might be enough - that's first order + 5.1 (I just made that up :-)). :-) I also fear(ed) that 5.1 + FOA ("B++"

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

> is sufficient for all uses that was supposed to read… "is not sufficient for all uses"… Svein ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

ia intended for smaller loudspeaker arrays. Cheers, Svein > From: Dave Malham > Subject: Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, > MPEG/ITU style... > Date: 20. januar 2013 17:53:31 GMT+01:00 > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Reply-To

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Hence the discussion re MPEG...! ;-) On 20 Jan 2013, at 4:53 pm, Dave Malham wrote: > Hi Jo, > To some extent, yes, but only if you are working with material > which can tolerate the artefacts that blind source separation > algorithms will, sooner or later - and usually sooner - generate.

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Hi Jo, To some extent, yes, but only if you are working with material which can tolerate the artefacts that blind source separation algorithms will, sooner or later - and usually sooner - generate. Such algorithms, including those in Harpex, are getting much better (I can remember hearing some

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Hi Dave, I'll throw in... On 20 Jan 2013, at 9:02 am, Dave Malham wrote: > The biggest limitation to > the whole thing is the availability of higher order microphones, Actually, as we've heard, upsampling from a 1st order mic can give very good results. Svein Berge's Harpex (http://www.harpe

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Hi Stefan, I doubt if B+ would meet the currently perceived needs of cinema surround mixers/producers since it does not have the ability to go "discrete". B++ might be enough - that's first order + 5.1 (I just made that up :-)). A better option would be at least third order, preferably fifth -

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Reading back, and evaluating... http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/scmsAdmin/uploads/005/384/Miles_Fulwider_Thesis.pdf I believe B+ "classic" could serve as a convincing "1st" proposal for a sound-field based 3D cinema audio system. (And therefore, as a general surround format). The very obvious cha

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

(Now in the thread-context where it belongs, sorry for my error before...) Dear Mr. Furse, many thanks for some real contributions, in the past and now... :-) Now, on a short note: There might not be sufficient time left to add ideas (and APIs) like presented to any standad they will issu

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Very interesting post & following discussion. I've actually been added very recently to the IST/37 committee, which apparently is a close relative to the MPEG one. However, I've not talked to any other members so far and I'm not sure how all this stuff works just yet! In other news, I spent a bit

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Michael Chapman wrote: OK, Stefan, I'll look at my diary ;-(> But 1) January 14-23 is ten days ... it is alo both "tentative" and 'next' week; 2 How does all this tye in with "the MPEG-H 3D Audio Workshop" (see copied email below). 1) I am sorry, the date for the MPEG meetings seem to di

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

OK, Stefan, I'll look at my diary ;-(> But 1) January 14-23 is ten days ... it is alo both "tentative" and 'next' week; 2 How does all this tye in with "the MPEG-H 3D Audio Workshop" (see copied email below). Whether related, or not, it would seem worth involving Gregory Pallone. If Orange (aka

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

Michael Chapman wrote: The current situation at MPEG: http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/com16/video/Pages/jctvc.aspx Next meetings: * Geneva, Switzerland, October 2013 (tentative) * Vienna, Austria, 27 July - 2 August 2013 (tentative) * Incheon, Korea, 20-26 April 2013 (t

Re: [Sursound] A proposal for an Ambisonics based 3D audio codec, MPEG/ITU style...

> The current situation at MPEG: > > http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/com16/video/Pages/jctvc.aspx > > Next meetings: > >> * Geneva, Switzerland, October 2013 (tentative) >> * Vienna, Austria, 27 July - 2 August 2013 (tentative) >> * Incheon, Korea, 20-26 April 2013 (tentative) >