Hi Augustine, Many thanks for your suggestion. I had considered MaxMSP, but I'm not a seasoned user of it. The MIDI project I referenced is actually Arduino-based, and I've built a number of controllers using the Arduino boards. The down side of using a (RF) remote controller for my work is that some of the sound rooms employ steel walls--virtually Faraday shields--thus precluding RF reception. One workaround is to use a PIC chip to send multiple control signals along a single coax cable. My response boxes work this way: I don't have to use multi-conductor cables or multi-pin connectors to go through an audiometric test booth; yet, I can transmit and receive multiple signals (basic multiplexing via a microcontroller). I should really look more into MaxMSP--I have this as well as FlowStone, LabVIEW, and a number of related applications. For years, I've used NI LabVIEW because I'm comfortable with it. But I'm not aware of ASIO drivers that allow using most audio interfaces. Same goes for MATLAB--in my experience, you can only use two channels of any given sound card regardless of the card's channel count. I had built a hardware controller that integrates with most DAWs--and it interfaces with a MOTU 828 (or any audio device). It also uses a chip from a Microsoft mouse (easily recognized human interface using Mac or PC) to control Pause, Play, etc. functions. Discrete signals, not human operation, signal the mouse's functions. In the end, I had an automated stimuli presentation and data collection system (data was response time as well as perceived direction--the localization study appeared in Noise & Health). Furthermore, it allowed for a forced-choice test method. All of this could have been implemented with software, but I chose the tools that were available to me at the time. As my programming skills improve (along with my understanding of Ambisonics), I find new methods and tools needed to perform tasks. I very much appreciate your suggestions and will most likely make good use of them. Kind regards, Eric
________________________________ From: Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com> To: Eric Carmichel <e...@elcaudio.com>; Surround Sound discussion group <sursound@music.vt.edu> Sent: Saturday, October 6, 2012 2:43 AM Subject: Re: [Sursound] Take a Load off Intel (and put the Load on IC) 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... (refer to >original post) > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20121006/b598b708/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
