I am not sure about the second part of your post. But with regards to the first half did you consider using max msp (or probably supercollider) ? you could control as many channels as you want with a computer and control them with almost anything from a wii controller via blue tooth to more or les anything with an aduino.
On 6 October 2012 01:37, Eric Carmichel <e...@elcaudio.com> wrote: > Ok, the subject title is a take on the Robbie Robertson/The Band/Dylan > song The Weight (Take a load off Annie... and you can put the load right on > me). So what does this have to do with sursound? Answer: Native processing > (Intel) versus dedicated hardware control (via a collection of BB PGA2311 > ICs). > One of my early concerns regarding research and Ambisonics had to do with > simultaneous control of 8 or more channels. I'm guessing (and it's really a > guess) that many Ambisonic Aficionados (AA?) use either a surround > preamp/receiver or the Master fader of a DAW--so long as the fader can > provide control for a 4-channel (or greater) buss. I don't like using a > mouse-n-DAW because this requires being at the computer. Surround > controllers, on the other hand, are generally limited in their number of > channels or become expensive. One solution to my 'dilemma' was to use a DAW > surface controller. The simplest implementation of this idea was an attempt > to use a MIDI volume controller to remotely control the Master fader. A kit > available from midikits.net23.net provided an easy to build and flexible > solution. This is a hardware device with a USB interface that serves to > control the (software) Master fader. Another solution, for anyone dealing > with large channel > counts, is to use programmable gain amplifiers. This is probably what the > majority of modern surround receivers use. But by building my own preamp, I > achieved a large channel count by using serially-connected Burr Brown > PGA2311 ICs. A single rotary pulse encoder controls all channels, but now I > have the added benefit of software control. The software control has > advantages when automating data collection and stimuli presentation. > Attempts of mixing DAQ applications and DAWs via ReWire weren't so > successful. The hybrid solution works well. This brings me to my recent > post regarding hyfi... > Thanks to all who wrote. The info on Richard Furse's site helped > immensely. Regarding my 6th (or roaming speaker): This channel stands alone > for a few reasons that I didn't explain but will comment on here: First, my > current study involves SNRs in reverberant environments. The primary noise > source is talkers and room reflections... specifically, talkers at a > distance. The signal is speech from a nearby talker. This represents a > scenario found in restaurants, and a listening condition that is difficult > for cochlear implant users. In the absence of other noise or talkers, the > SPL of direct sound coming from the talker (signal) is considerably greater > than the resulting echoes that follow. This may not be the case for > extremely reverberant spaces such as the Hamilton Mausoleum, but it does > apply to a typical classroom or restaurant. In fact, the signal-to-reverb > ratio of the talker's voice gives a clue as to his/her distance. This ratio > changes depending on > the noise source's distance from the listener. I could use a minimal > wet/dry mix to create 'some' reverberation for the nearby talker, but it > isn't really necessary. Another consideration (the real story) is that the > speech signal emanating from the lone speaker is created on the fly. I use > a fixed number of words to make data collection simple, but software > randomly mixes the word order (grammatically correct sentences aren't > required). This way, I use a handheld response box containing, say, 8 words > written on push-buttons, and the subject simply pushes the buttons in the > order the words are heard. (Keyboards or word recognition software to > collect responses becomes unwieldy and unreliable). When the listener makes > x consecutive mistakes, the SNR is automatically improved to make listening > easier (or decreased to make it more difficult in the case of consecutive > correct responses). The noise is surround noise via an Ambisonic set up and > auralizaton/or > live recordings of restaurant noise. Although reverberant noise is > generally diffuse, localization cues and "glimpsing" aid the listener in > segregating and understanding the signal. At least that's the idea. > I'm fortunate that, for the time-being, I have access to a controlled > listening environments. You can see photos of my gear and the room by going > to > elcaudio.com/research/page_001.htm > elcaudio.com/research/page_002.htm > elcaudio.com/research/page_003.htm > The room isn't my own, and my thanks go to Dr. William (Bill) Yost for > letting me use his research space. > I have an array of speakers at home, but data collected from a living room > hardly qualifies as "controlled" or scientific. This was why I was > wondering whether an Ambiophonic-Ambisonic hybrid system might be possible. > Ideally, I'd like to construct a system that is portable. Gobos and flats > may work, particularly if they are constructed of materials that provide > absorption across the speech spectrum of frequencies. Low-frequency > absorption via a gobo would be a more daunting task, though the right combo > of mass and compliance could yield a low Q absorber. Just ideas... and I > appreciate the plethora of wisdom others on this site have provided. In the > meantime, I continue to enjoy make Ambisonic field recordings solely for > the fun of it. My last recording was an attempt to record a bald eagle at a > nearby lake. Most of what I captured was an agitated squirrel and a flying > insect that found the mic's windscreen to be a good landing pad. Fun > effects! > Best, > Eric > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20121005/880d9d73/attachment.html > > > _______________________________________________ > Sursound mailing list > Sursound@music.vt.edu > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > -- 07580951119 augustine.leudar.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20121006/253168d4/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
