Bearcat M. Şandor wrote:
On 07/10/2011 11:10 AM, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
To clarify a few basic things:
The first poster in this thread (and obviously some other people who
maybe should have known better) are claiming that you could receive a
360º representation via just two (supposedly narrow) front speakers.
First poster here. Just to clarify, i didn't claim anything like that. I
just asked if anyone had heard any of these recent 2-channel 3D audio
systems and wondered what they thought of them. My main point was
whining about the expense of a 12+ channel audio system vs the
possibility of full sphere surround experience with 2 channels. In
fact, i stated that i had not heard convincing 3D yet. Perhaps a more
forward sound stage, but i've heard good body from my speakers with no
"3D" applied.
Ok, fair enough. Your question is/was actually very good.
However, the "12+ channel" audio system (for Ambisonics?) is a
caricature, at best. 8 horizontal speakers would be enough for
Ambisonics 3rd order, for home purposes. 1st order can be reproduced
with 4 speakers, you really won't need more than 6. Everybody knows
this... :-)
In this sense, your posting was polemic, because you also knew this. Right?
Best regards,
Stefan
P.S.: Unless we speak about "full sphere 3D", and Ambisonics would need
more speakers. However, the thead topic says "360 degree sound".
Therefore, 360º horizontal suround sound and "3D sound" has been mixed
up in the following postings...
Prof. Choueiri's solution requires special speakers and a controlled
environment, in my understanding. I remain sceptical if the peformance
of this system will come close to a real surround system, which would
have to been tested in an objective way. (I have said that my critic
doesn't refer to Ambiophonics, which is not an "extreme XTC for
everything" solution. Maybe I am also polemic... :-) )
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
