2011/5/1 Paul Hodges <pwh-surro...@cassland.org> > --On 01 May 2011 12:15 +0100 Richard Dobson < > richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: > > Have any listening tests actually been carried out to establish what >> "typical" users consider to be sufficiently good localization? >> > > An interesting comparison would be to start with horizontal first-order, > and then to assess whether the common man finds a switch to full 3D > first-order or to horizontal third-order the greater improvement in effect. > (So far, I have heard only anecdotal answers to this question.) > > Another anecdotal answer, which doesn't even quite address the question: The difference between 1st order horizontal and 3rd order horizontal is easy to hear for the common man. This was one of the conclusions of the harpex listening tests, and in line with previous tests by Stéphanie Bertet et al. More interestingly for us, of course, was that you can get 3rd order localization from 1st order material with the harpex decoder. But no decoder can make meaningful 3D material from a horizontal source. So if I had to choose between 3rd order horizontal and 1st order 3D, I would choose 1st order 3D any time.
Svein Berge -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110501/06f26d8c/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
