Re: [Sursound] Ambdec porting to android? Suitable students project - Creation of ambisonic player?
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 02:42:30PM +0200 Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: I was appearently a little hot on the trail HDMI sound drivers are not yet verified / ported to the puppy linux distributin that is available for the A8 based Mele 1000 settop box. So next idea for someone else than me, porting of ambdec with a multichannel player to Android 2.3 instead? Or maybe just skip the decoding on the device and play multi channel predecoded FLAC or OGG loudspeaker feeds, but that is not much fun :-) And have to be verified to work. There are a lot of low cost android players with hdmi multichannel sound running Android on http://s.dealextreme.com/search/android+media+player Have a nice summer Bo-Erik Something you might want to look at is the neutron player. It currently does ambiophonic R.A.C.E DSP, and it would be really cool to add ambisonic functionality to that. See https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.neutroncode.mp for details. -- Bearcat M. Şandor Feline Soul Systems Voice: 872.CAT.SOUL (872.228.7685) Fax: 855.861.6282 Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor My public pgp key is attached for verification of my identity -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120529/525e8bbf/attachment.bin ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] Chasing flies with ambisoinics? (was Re: microphone epiphany ?)
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:29:10PM + Fons Adriaensen wrote: On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 03:51:10PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote: Am I right in thinking the W component gives you enhanced distance information for a given sound source ? No. W is simply essential for anything Ambisonic to work at all. Apart from the 'proximity effect', a microphone (any) does not provide any information on the distance of a sound source, because there are no other physical parameters of the sound field that provide distance information. A sound wave coming from a source at 100m looks just the same as one from a source at 10m. The only difference is a small change in the curvature of the wavefront (which is what produces the proximity effect). Human perception of distance is based on interpretation of the sound: known level and spectra of certain sources, the timing and level of reflections and reverb, etc. It's 'brainwork' based on a learning process and the resulting expectations. No mic can do that. Ciao, -- FA This touches on something i've wondered for a while now. Discrete surround always sounds as though it's in a fixed ring to me. Sounds are always the same distance away. I've experianced that with binaural recordings as well. Is there a surround sound method that will reproduce actual depth enough so that you could track the movment of a fly in a room? I'd love a system where i could hear a fly moving towards my face, veering off a few inches away, moving at a diagonal to 5' away then zig-zaging back and around my head. Would the lack of a visual component effect that strongly? I can still locate a fly without seeing it. Can ambisonics do that with a good mic for the W? Thanks, Bearcat -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120529/b153f60d/attachment.bin ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] online multichannel release/side topic
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 06:05:44PM + Dave Hunt wrote: Hi, Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 03:51:03 - From: John Lundsten john.lunds...@blueyonder.co.uk IMO if one wants to store so called linear PCM, use WAV. All other formats offer less only exist for (a) backward compatibility for which I have no problem or (b) to screw the customer, which I find obnoxious. AIFF, AIFC, SD2, CAF, have no good reason to exist! (beyond some dodgy Commercial imperative to .) John L WAV itself, although adopted for compatibility and universality reasons, has been modified (BWAV, WAVE-FORMAT-EXTENSIBLE, W64, RF64), and may become obsolete. Nothing lasts for ever. Being a long term Mac user, almost my entire collection of audio files are AIFF. I feel secure using it, and have never had any problem with the format, whereas some WAV files don't work with some applications and have to be converted Ciao, Dave. Why would wav be obsoleted and all these other formats survive? Don't they depend on wav in the first place? I know that CDs are converted to wav first then to whatever format you want them in but can you convert a CD directly to flac (or wavpack in my case)? If i'm messing around (i'm not a serious audio professional) in Ardour isn't it a wave file first, then a flac file (or what have you)? -- Bearcat M. Şandor Cell: 406.210.3500 Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Attached Message Part Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/2025/5da171b5/attachment.bin ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound
On 07/20/2011 03:49 AM, Richard Dobson wrote: So - noisy pterodactyls and dragons are mixing it with the brass section. How weird is that likely to sound? Especially if the music track itself has been recorded in surround the way so many people enthuse about here? Dragons in the Brass section? I think groups like Blind Guardian would embrace this format in that case. :) -- Bearcat M. Şandor Cell: 406.210.3500 Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound
I found that review/interview of the 2 channel surround sound i was referring to earlier: http://www.hometheater.com/content/tech-spotlight-srs-future-surround The first copy i saw didn't have the 2nd page. In it it's explained that you'd need speakers behind you to hear things behind you. They speak of proximity, of things moving closer and further away from your face. Can ambisonics do that as well? -- Bearcat M. Şandor Cell: 406.210.3500 Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound
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. -- Bearcat M. Şandor Cell: 406.210.3500 Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] the recent 2-channel 3D sound formats and their viability for actual 360 degree sound
Folks, I've been reading up on the various proposals for 3D sound from a set of stereo speakers. The 3D Audio Alliance is working on such a system. Astound Surround is getting ready to market, Edward Choueiri is working on the same idea (see: http://www.studio360.org/2011/apr/29/adventures-3d-sound/ ) and there are others. I used to have a Carver pre-amp with Carver's Holography button but i could never get it to do much. Has anyone heard a truly 3D/360 surround effect from 2 speakers using this stuff? Ever heard a fly buzzing around your head, or an object in the back far-left of you or some such? Can any of this do as good of a job as Ambisonics? Is all of this just related to head transfer function mathematics? I've listened to some of the headphone applications of this like binaural and whatever these folks are doing here http://www.3d60.co.uk/index.php That demo on the 3D60 page sounds really cool, however nothing ever sounds like it's more than a foot from my head and nothing is ever right in front of me. Why can't they create an effect of something coming from a long distance away and getting closer and closer behind me? If it's all related to head transfer function you'd think you could create any sound your ears can hear. I'm looking at my audio system building options and I'd love to throw my money/space decor at 2 really good speakers and a good 2 channel pre-amp instead of 12 speakers in an ambisonic system with all the associated electronics. Any thoughts on all this 3D through 2 channel stuff? Thanks, -- Bearcat M. Şandor Jabber/xmpp/gtalk/email: bear...@feline-soul.net MSN: bearcatsan...@hotmail.com Yahoo: bearcatsandor AIM: bearcatmsandor ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
