> If the response to "lack of perfection" is always "do nothing", > nothing will be done.
Which perfectly explains why we don't have an accepted ambisonic file format. No one is willing to accept limitations... and it is so easy to find limitations in formats. I firmly believe that a successful ambisonic file format can only be achieved with CONSENSUS. The contents of the format itself is irrelevant. So the real challenge is how to *engineer* consensus. > BTW, the AES has just announced a project "AES-X212" to develop a file > format for HRTF data; "The format will be designed to include source > materials from different HRTF databases". See: ... there's one way to engineer consensus, get a respected institution to take on the responsibility... AES says: " If you have information on other standards, or standards projects, with similar scopes to these projects, please contact the AES Standards secretariat." Of course ... all that said ... once such technologies as Google glasses take hold, or Apple starts putting gyroscopes in their ear buds (anyone want to put money on it?) ... ambisonic file formats will either become irrelevant (apps can do things in their own way) or will be standardised by these commercial bodies (which is _not_ a bad thing, because open-source doesn't do consensus, it fractures ... and the sursound community will benefit from a standard, _any_ standard). BTW ... isn't there research that says that the human cognitive systems quickly adapts to non-individualised HRTFs? In other words, just as long as one uses the same HRTFs constantly, then the results will start approaching the effects of individualised HRTFs (I remember reading that somewhere). Etienne _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
