On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 22:23 +0100, Folderol wrote: > On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 17:10:35 -0400 > Paul Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Ralf Mardorf > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > @ nonsense and bullshit, where are the examples that it works? > > > > > > There is no valid recording with more than 1 or 2 channels, regarding to > > > a natural impression. Some art projects that didn't try to give a > > > natural impression are something very, very different. > > > > > > Most audio engineers still fail regarding to stereo and mono issues. I > > > wonder about the geniuses who are able to do 5.1 and all the other > > > stuff. > > > > > > Please post links to the geniuses work, but call me names. > > > > ralf, you simply don't have any idea what you're talking about, unless > > you try to limit your comments to commercially released material. you > > made no indication that you intended to use this limitation. > > > > people have been recording with/for ambisonics for nearly 40 years > > now. recording with multiple microphones (including things like the > > eigenmike > > http://www.mhacoustics.com/mh_acoustics/Eigenmike_microphone_array.html > > which by itself makes your point null and void) is common enough that > > sound on sound has articles on it. > > I remember when 2001 first came out, being totally astonished by the > sequence where the ape-man first uses a bone as a club. There was the > totally realistic effect of a gust of wind moving from the screen to the > rear of the cinema. I've no idea what system was in use, but it > certainly wasn't 2 channel stereo! >
Was it natural or 'hyper'-natural? _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
