Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Hi there - just let you know, the POA Decoding plugins were released last week. Many thanks to the testers! We've also released some updates to the TOA plugin libraries, most notably some new metering plugins, including a BS1770/R128/A85-type loudness estimator for TOA. http://www.blueripplesound.com/products/poa-decoding-vst http://www.blueripplesound.com/news/new-toa-metering ... and hopefully there'll be some more exciting stuff very soon! Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: 31 December 2013 14:34 To: 'Surround Sound discussion group' Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! As mentioned here as a possibility, we (Blue Ripple Sound) have got around to packaging up a set of POA (Plain Old Ambisonic) VST decoder plugins that parallel the higher resolution TOA ones. Never let it be said that we don't listen to our users ;-) Any volunteers for beta testing? If so, please contact me *OFF LIST*. As there are fewer input channels involved, some of these plugins do work in a broader range of VST hosts than the TOA ones. This means more opportunities for compatibility issues, so we're particularly looking for folk who are NOT using Reaper. And, more importantly: Best Wishes to everyone for a very Happy New Year! --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Thanks to the volunteers - I think we have plenty (for now)! Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: 31 December 2013 14:34 To: 'Surround Sound discussion group' Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! As mentioned here as a possibility, we (Blue Ripple Sound) have got around to packaging up a set of POA (Plain Old Ambisonic) VST decoder plugins that parallel the higher resolution TOA ones. Never let it be said that we don't listen to our users ;-) Any volunteers for beta testing? If so, please contact me *OFF LIST*. As there are fewer input channels involved, some of these plugins do work in a broader range of VST hosts than the TOA ones. This means more opportunities for compatibility issues, so we're particularly looking for folk who are NOT using Reaper. And, more importantly: Best Wishes to everyone for a very Happy New Year! --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons
Of course, you're quite right as usual! In crude terms, a speaker array with a small number of speakers only has a few degrees of freedom with which to reconstruct spherical harmonics. (Rapture3D will manage this for you.) However, the higher order harmonics also have a range of other uses in frequency bands where soundfield reconstruction is not being used, so it's good to have them! Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Fons Adriaensen Sent: 26 November 2013 00:47 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons [...] But for regular or almost regular rigs the only result of using higher order components that the rig can't reproduce without aliasing into lower ones would be to create 'detents' at the speaker locations. [...] ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Here, here. I've been one of the Beta tests and they are really good. All we need now are Protools versions :-) On 21 November 2013 15:49, Garth Paine ga...@activatedspace.com wrote: These are a wonderful contribution to the professionalisation of Ambisonics workflow - thanks so much :-) Cheers, Garth Paine ga...@activatedspace.com On Nov 21, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Richard Furse rich...@muse440.com wrote: Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131121/cc2107d4/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University. These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University Dave Malham Honorary Fellow, Department of Music The University of York York YO10 5DD UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131125/78857a8b/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 07:31:33AM +, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: Am I to understand that everything is OK if I use the third order plugins to work on my first order tetramic recording. And then I can expect everything to be as it should if I decode just the first order info via a first order ambdec ? Yes. The _signals_ for any (e.g. 1st) order are a subset of those for higher order. But a low order decoder will use them in a different way than a higher order one. If your DAW allows to connect only the 1swt order outputs of the panners you don't even need a 3rd order bus and master. As a follow up question, would it be to my advantage to have the input signals converted to third order and stay there even for the decoding. Even if I only have a speaker rig of a circle of six horizontal and 2 speakers on the floor and 2 in the ceiling. Only if you expect them to be used at a place where a 3rd order decode is possible and available. On your own rig you would still have to use only the first order subset, as it can't be used for 3rd order (not enough speakers). When using panning I'd be prepared to create and mix higher order content in a studio that has only 1st order monitoring (if that 1st order system is OK). But I'd not consider any automatic 'upordering' if I can't check the result. Depending on the answer how about if I reconfigure the playback to a horizontal hexagonal ring of 6 and top and bottom rings of 4, the intra speaker distance in the 4 rings being the same as the distance between the speakers in the hexagon? 4 + 6 + 4 would support second order, but not third. For 3rd you'd need something like 6 + 8 + 6 + 1, with the rings of 6 at + and - 45 degrees elevation. Does third order decode add any advantage ? It certainly does if the material is generated in third order directly, i.e. using multitrack techniques and panning. OTOH, in my experience, natural 1st order recordings (made with a AMB mic) give much better results whem reproduced using a *correct* 1st order decode than when processed into higher order using e.g. Harpex. At least if you expect something that sounds natural rather than directional effects (which may be what is wanted in some cases...) I routinely use AMB playback systems for e.g. EA music concerts, creating virtual speakers wherever the composer wants them. This is a lot more practical than providing or moving real ones for each and every piece. For this sort of thing, 3rd order is the minimum that works well enough for someone expecting an ad-hoc speaker system for his composition. And of course, if the composer creates his work directly in 3rd order AMB (as I encourage them to do) the results are even better. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons
-Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Fons Adriaensen Sent: 25 November 2013 11:03 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 07:31:33AM +, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote: [...] As a follow up question, would it be to my advantage to have the input signals converted to third order and stay there even for the decoding. Even if I only have a speaker rig of a circle of six horizontal and 2 speakers on the floor and 2 in the ceiling. Only if you expect them to be used at a place where a 3rd order decode is possible and available. On your own rig you would still have to use only the first order subset, as it can't be used for 3rd order (not enough speakers). [...] It's certainly true that some decoding methods can become highly unstable when provided with an inadequate number of speakers and/or an uneven distribution. However, the Rapture3D decoders (including the TOA ones) do NOT have this problem. One of the core features of the Rapture3D decoder generator is its handling of arbitrary/irregular speaker layouts - a LOT of work went into this a few years ago. For the best quality output, you should feed these decoders with the highest order actual signal you have, regardless of how many speakers are present - the more accurate information these decoders have, the better they can perform. They will make some use of higher order components for almost all speaker layouts, although the amounts vary (the only exception I can think of now is mono, where only the W/omni component is used). That's all to say: if you have some good method and/or reason to increase the spatial detail of your tetramic material from first order to third order, perhaps through upsampling or other treatment, or as a side effect of processing, then that extra detail CAN make a difference, even on a small number of speakers. And personally, I don't consider ten speakers to be a particularly small number :-) Similarly, when forming a mix by simply panning mono sources into place, you can get significantly sharper results at third order rather than first, even if you only have a few speakers. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 03:14:02PM -, Richard Furse wrote: However, the Rapture3D decoders (including the TOA ones) do NOT have this problem. One of the core features of the Rapture3D decoder generator is its handling of arbitrary/irregular speaker layouts - a LOT of work went into this a few years ago. For the best quality output, you should feed these decoders with the highest order actual signal you have, regardless of how many speakers are present - the more accurate information these decoders have, the better they can perform. They will make some use of higher order components for almost all speaker layouts, although the amounts vary (the only exception I can think of now is mono, where only the W/omni component is used). For irregular layouts I tend to agree - you could use the higher order information only in the directions the rig is able to support higher resolution. But none of the published 'automatic' methods claiming to create good decoders for irregular layouts do this. But for regular or almost regular rigs the only result of using higher order components that the rig can't reproduce without aliasing into lower ones would be to create 'detents' at the speaker locations. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
It's certainly true that some decoding methods can become highly unstable when provided with an inadequate number of speakers and/or an uneven distribution. However, the Rapture3D decoders (including the TOA ones) do NOT have this problem. One of the core features of the Rapture3D decoder generator is its handling of arbitrary/irregular speaker layouts - a LOT of work went into this a few years ago. For the best quality output, you should feed these decoders with the highest order actual signal you have, regardless of how many speakers are present - the more accurate information these decoders have, the better they can perform. They will make some use of higher order components for almost all speaker layouts, although the amounts vary (the only exception I can think of now is mono, where only the W/omni component is used). Mr. Furse, are the Rapture3D TOA decoders and their development described in detail anywhere? I have long thought that HOA should be a seamless step up from FOA but alas, losing my ability this Millenium to reed rite en kunt, I have had difficulties investigating this. BLaH would like to steal ... I mean improve on your work. ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins - follow up Question to Fons
Hi Am I to understand that everything is OK if I use the third order plugins to work on my first order tetramic recording. And then I can expect everything to be as it should if I decode just the first order info via a first order ambdec ? I do not at this time expect to add any second or third order signals in to my projects. As a follow up question, would it be to my advantage to have the input signals converted to third order and stay there even for the decoding Even if I only have a speaker rig of a circle of six horizontal and 2 speakers on the floor and 2 in the ceiling. Depending on the answer how about if I reconfigure the playback to a horizontal hexagonal ring of 6 and top and bottom rings of 4, the intra speaker distance in the 4 rings being the same as the distance between the speakers in the hexagon? Does third order decode add any advantage ? Best Regards Bo-Erik Sandholm -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Fons Adriaensen Sent: den 22 november 2013 22:20 To: sursound@music.vt.edu Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:19:58AM -0800, Aaron Heller wrote: I hate to contradict you, but my experience playing my first-order recordings (e.g. Pulcinella, LvB 4th Sym, available on Ambisonia) on the 2nd or 3rd order presets in Ambdec results in decoding errors. The most obvious artifact is that frontal sources sound too close, sometimes right in front of my face. When using a 3rd order max rE decoder with 1st order input, the gain on the first order signals is too high. The error is around 2.3 dB for a 2D decoder, and 3.5 dB for 3D. In both cases the resulting decode is closer to systematic (rV = 1) than to max rE. For an in-phase decoder the errors are higher, around 5 dB for 3D. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Another possible approach is to use a standard 1st order microphone set in the far field and add panned in (at third order) signals from close mics from each of the instruments. These will need to be delayed to match the distance to the main POA mic. It might also be necessary to some second/third order components corresponding to early reflections but this would have to be experimented with. It won't be perfect but it will be closer to the output from a true third order mic than using Harpex - and without the processing artefacts. Dave On 22 November 2013 22:23, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote: �David Pickett d...@fugato.com�wrote: How does one record in third order (or indeed any order above first order)?�� What kind of microphone array does one need, for instance, for 3rd order with no height information (WXYUVPQ)?� Is there a native format method for HOA or is it all extended A format, with conversion through matrices? I don't dispute Eric's very short, but very full summary but I think we may be at cross purposes. Richard Furse's software obviously works with a higher order microphone (if anyone has one) but I would suggest his primary motivation was for synthesised higher order soundfields. You can obviously create a synthetic soundfield of any order you want. Michael All excellent questions. �It is not quite as obvious how to record any order of Ambisonics above first order. �It will require some sort of microphone array and post-processing. �One of my favorites is the array described by Craven, Lawe and Travis in: Microphone arrays using tangential velocity sensors P.G. Craven, C. Travis, M.J. Law We introduce a new class of 3D microphone arrays that use symmetrical arrangements of tangential velocity sensors.� Use of velocity sensors allows these arrays to recover spherical harmonics of a given degree with less low-frequency boost than when using pressure sensors only.� As an example we present a symmetrical array of twelve velocity sensors that resolves the eight harmonics of degrees 1 and 2.� A second-order spherical microphone can now be constructed by combining this array with one or more pressure sensors that provide the missing harmonic of degree 0. http://ambisonics.iem.at/symposium2009/proceedings/ambisym09-craventravis-tangentialsphmic.pdf/at_download/file The other practical method for constructing an array that produces higher order spherical harmonic outputs is to use a group of omnidirectional microphones on a sphere, such as the commercially available Eigenmike: http://www.mhacoustics.com/products There are other methods. �It's still early days for this technology. Eric Benjamin -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131122/1436acf9/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University. These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University Dave Malham Honorary Fellow, Department of Music The University of York York YO10 5DD UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131123/f50985b7/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Hi Richard, The only problem I see is that straight first order decoding generally has a different ratio of W to XYZ components that that used for third order, which ideally should be corrected before feeding first order material to a third order decoder, otherwise the first order material in the mix won't be decoded optimally. Unfortunately, of course, correcting this on the first order material in the mix (so that it is right on TOA decoders) means that if it is then decoded at first order (say, with an older decoder) the decode will be wrong - and unfixable, as we've discussed before on this forum. The only full solution is to keep first order only material completely separate from third order so that it can be handled separately at the decoder - or, alternatively, say it has to be 3rd order always, though I am not sure how this would work out with decoders to small numbers of speakers. Dave On 22 November 2013 17:12, Richard Furse rich...@muse440.com wrote: Yes - there basically aren't any problems applying the processing operations to material that is only first order. Feeding first order material to a third order decoder raises more subtle issues. If you're working with first order material, we'd normally recommend you still work at third order within Reaper, i.e. set all your track channel counts to 16. If you force first order by setting your channel counts to 4 then everything will work, but you won't save much CPU and you'll lose spatial accuracy in scenarios where intermediate processing uses second or third order components. When you get to your output stage, if there isn't any second or third order detail that you want, you can always export at first order by simply taking only the first four channels from the TOA mix. On decoding, I should start by saying we typically get good results feeding first order material directly into our third order decoders. We wondered about including an order switch here, and have done exactly that for the Rapture3D Advanced decoder plugins. However, for the normal TOA Decoding plugins we decided it would be better to focus on making everything work cleanly at third order, and encourage treatment of first order material if it's really needed (and IMHO it generally isn't) as folk are inevitably going to want to add first order recordings into third order mixes. There's a First Order Injector in the Upmixers library that provides a couple of such treatments, and an equivalent result can be achieved using the Order Amplifier and/or Diffuser plugins in the Manipulators library. These treatments don't attempt to sharpen the image. In contrast, you should also be able to upsample to third order using Svein's excellent HARPEX-B plugin, although the public version of that currently generates only horizontal components at third order (for compatibility with channel count limits in other hosts). That all said, first order material added directly to a third order mix and then decoded at third order is generally just blurrier or less sharp than real third order material (as one would expect!) but hopefully that's fine for most scenarios. Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dave Malham Sent: 22 November 2013 13:42 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Shouldn't be any problems with any of the processing operations (Richard?) but the decoding will need to set at 1st order. Dave On 22 November 2013 07:40, Bo-Erik Sandholm bo-erik.sandh...@ericsson.comwrote: Hi Is there any technical problems in using third order processing with only first order data ? If I remember correctly it should not be a problem? Only the overhead of having 12 unused tracks in the reaper layout? Nice of you to promote Ambisonics by offering the basic plugins for free. Thank you Bo-Erik Sandholm Sweden -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: den 21 november 2013 14:14 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
I basically agree with all of this - I just don't think it's that big of an issue in practice. We don't generally ask engineers to provide their stereo mixes twice for -3dB and -6dB pan laws, though arguably we should. [Okay, tenuous parallel.] HOWEVER, we want these plugin libraries to do what folk need! We actually already have first order decoders computed for all these layouts, reasonably aligned with the third order ones - they are already used in Rapture3D. Putting them into a separate VST plugin library would be tedious but easy. Should we do this? Would this address everything raised on this thread? IMHO the biggest argument against it is that these minor worries might sow FUD among potential ambisonic novices (I can imagine a naïve engineer observing that 5.1 doesn't have these issues). Quick vote maybe? If folk email me *OFF-LIST* with I would use a first order decoding plugin library like that and we can get to a count of five from folk on this list, I'll schedule the work. I'll subtract one for each email saying No! Too much FUD! How's that? ;-) Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dave Malham Sent: 23 November 2013 10:39 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi Richard, The only problem I see is that straight first order decoding generally has a different ratio of W to XYZ components that that used for third order, which ideally should be corrected before feeding first order material to a third order decoder, otherwise the first order material in the mix won't be decoded optimally. Unfortunately, of course, correcting this on the first order material in the mix (so that it is right on TOA decoders) means that if it is then decoded at first order (say, with an older decoder) the decode will be wrong - and unfixable, as we've discussed before on this forum. The only full solution is to keep first order only material completely separate from third order so that it can be handled separately at the decoder - or, alternatively, say it has to be 3rd order always, though I am not sure how this would work out with decoders to small numbers of speakers. Dave [...] ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Le 2013-11-22 12:12, Richard Furse a écrit : you should also be able to upsample to third order using Svein's excellent HARPEX-B plugin, although the public version of that currently generates only horizontal components at third order (for compatibility with channel count limits in other hosts). Is there a non-public, beta, version that outputs the full 3rd order 16 channels? - Daniel ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Le 2013-11-22 12:12, Richard Furse a �crit : you should also be able to upsample to third order using Svein's excellent HARPEX-B plugin, although the public version of that currently generates only horizontal components at third order (for compatibility with channel count limits in other hosts). Is there a non-public, beta, version that outputs the full 3rd order 16 channels? Non, (or so I am informed). Michael - Daniel ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Yes - there basically aren't any problems applying the processing operations to material that is only first order. Feeding first order material to a third order decoder raises more subtle issues. If you're working with first order material, we'd normally recommend you still work at third order within Reaper, i.e. set all your track channel counts to 16. If you force first order by setting your channel counts to 4 then everything will work, but you won't save much CPU and you'll lose spatial accuracy in scenarios where intermediate processing uses second or third order components. When you get to your output stage, if there isn't any second or third order detail that you want, you can always export at first order by simply taking only the first four channels from the TOA mix. On decoding, I should start by saying we typically get good results feeding first order material directly into our third order decoders. We wondered about including an order switch here, and have done exactly that for the Rapture3D Advanced decoder plugins. However, for the normal TOA Decoding plugins we decided it would be better to focus on making everything work cleanly at third order, and encourage treatment of first order material if it's really needed (and IMHO it generally isn't) as folk are inevitably going to want to add first order recordings into third order mixes. There's a First Order Injector in the Upmixers library that provides a couple of such treatments, and an equivalent result can be achieved using the Order Amplifier and/or Diffuser plugins in the Manipulators library. These treatments don't attempt to sharpen the image. In contrast, you should also be able to upsample to third order using Svein's excellent HARPEX-B plugin, although the public version of that currently generates only horizontal components at third order (for compatibility with channel count limits in other hosts). That all said, first order material added directly to a third order mix and then decoded at third order is generally just blurrier or less sharp than real third order material (as one would expect!) but hopefully that's fine for most scenarios. Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dave Malham Sent: 22 November 2013 13:42 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Shouldn't be any problems with any of the processing operations (Richard?) but the decoding will need to set at 1st order. Dave On 22 November 2013 07:40, Bo-Erik Sandholm bo-erik.sandh...@ericsson.comwrote: Hi Is there any technical problems in using third order processing with only first order data ? If I remember correctly it should not be a problem? Only the overhead of having 12 unused tracks in the reaper layout? Nice of you to promote Ambisonics by offering the basic plugins for free. Thank you Bo-Erik Sandholm Sweden -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: den 21 november 2013 14:14 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University. These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University Dave Malham Honorary Fellow, Department of Music The University of York York YO10 5DD UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/201311 22/d895072c/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
I don't think you're contradicting me :-) If we're talking about the same thing then the in your face artifact you describe is exactly what the diffusion part of the First Order Injector addresses. You can get the same result from the Diffuser plugin with the spread set to zero. Beyond that, it may be that we're dealing with differences in decoders. We haven't found this to be a major issue. Best wishes, --Richard On 22 Nov 2013, at 19:19, Aaron Heller hel...@ai.sri.com wrote: I hate to contradict you, but my experience playing my first-order recordings (e.g. Pulcinella, LvB 4th Sym, available on Ambisonia) on the 2nd or 3rd order presets in Ambdec results in decoding errors. The most obvious artifact is that frontal sources sound too close, sometimes right in front of my face. In the Ambdec manual [p.4], Fons writes: The [inputs] required can be seen in the configuration window. Note that you can’t use e.g. a second order decoder and then only provide first order signals - the result will be a completely wrong decode. In a one-band rE_max decoder, you can fiddle with the channel gains on first-order files so they decode correctly though a higher-order decoder, but there's no way I know how to do that with a multiband decoder. Is there something I'm missing here? Aaron (hel...@ai.sri.com) Menlo Park, CA US On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Richard Furse rich...@muse440.com wrote: Yes - there basically aren't any problems applying the processing operations to material that is only first order. Feeding first order material to a third order decoder raises more subtle issues. If you're working with first order material, we'd normally recommend you still work at third order within Reaper, i.e. set all your track channel counts to 16. If you force first order by setting your channel counts to 4 then everything will work, but you won't save much CPU and you'll lose spatial accuracy in scenarios where intermediate processing uses second or third order components. When you get to your output stage, if there isn't any second or third order detail that you want, you can always export at first order by simply taking only the first four channels from the TOA mix. On decoding, I should start by saying we typically get good results feeding first order material directly into our third order decoders. We wondered about including an order switch here, and have done exactly that for the Rapture3D Advanced decoder plugins. However, for the normal TOA Decoding plugins we decided it would be better to focus on making everything work cleanly at third order, and encourage treatment of first order material if it's really needed (and IMHO it generally isn't) as folk are inevitably going to want to add first order recordings into third order mixes. There's a First Order Injector in the Upmixers library that provides a couple of such treatments, and an equivalent result can be achieved using the Order Amplifier and/or Diffuser plugins in the Manipulators library. These treatments don't attempt to sharpen the image. In contrast, you should also be able to upsample to third order using Svein's excellent HARPEX-B plugin, although the public version of that currently generates only horizontal components at third order (for compatibility with channel count limits in other hosts). That all said, first order material added directly to a third order mix and then decoded at third order is generally just blurrier or less sharp than real third order material (as one would expect!) but hopefully that's fine for most scenarios. Best wishes, --Richard -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Dave Malham Sent: 22 November 2013 13:42 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Shouldn't be any problems with any of the processing operations (Richard?) but the decoding will need to set at 1st order. Dave On 22 November 2013 07:40, Bo-Erik Sandholm bo-erik.sandh...@ericsson.comwrote: Hi Is there any technical problems in using third order processing with only first order data ? If I remember correctly it should not be a problem? Only the overhead of having 12 unused tracks in the reaper layout? Nice of you to promote Ambisonics by offering the basic plugins for free. Thank you Bo-Erik Sandholm Sweden -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: den 21 november 2013 14:14 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 11:19:58AM -0800, Aaron Heller wrote: I hate to contradict you, but my experience playing my first-order recordings (e.g. Pulcinella, LvB 4th Sym, available on Ambisonia) on the 2nd or 3rd order presets in Ambdec results in decoding errors. The most obvious artifact is that frontal sources sound too close, sometimes right in front of my face. When using a 3rd order max rE decoder with 1st order input, the gain on the first order signals is too high. The error is around 2.3 dB for a 2D decoder, and 3.5 dB for 3D. In both cases the resulting decode is closer to systematic (rV = 1) than to max rE. For an in-phase decoder the errors are higher, around 5 dB for 3D. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
At 18:12 22-11-13, Richard Furse wrote: Yes - there basically aren't any problems applying the processing operations to material that is only first order. Feeding first order material to a third order decoder raises more subtle issues. I have obviously missed something. How does one record in third order (or indeed any order above first order)? What kind of microphone array does one need, for instance, for 3rd order with no height information (WXYUVPQ)? Is there a native format method for HOA or is it all extended A format, with conversion through matrices? David ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
I'll jump in to add... the TOA plugins set provides a wide variety of very powerful tools. Is great to see BlueRipple has now made these available. If you've heard it mentioned that something is possible with Ambisonics, TOA likely includes it... ... and with a pretty GUI! My best, Joseph Anderson j.ander...@ambisonictoolkit.net http://www.ambisonictoolkit.net On 22 Nov 2013, at 6:38 am, John Leonard j...@johnleonard.co.uk wrote: I've been trying these out and they're extremely good. Highly recommended. John On 21 Nov 2013, at 13:14, Richard Furse rich...@muse440.com wrote: Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131122/99852949/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
David Pickett d...@fugato.com wrote: How does one record in third order (or indeed any order above first order)? What kind of microphone array does one need, for instance, for 3rd order with no height information (WXYUVPQ)? Is there a native format method for HOA or is it all extended A format, with conversion through matrices? All excellent questions. It is not quite as obvious how to record any order of Ambisonics above first order. It will require some sort of microphone array and post-processing. One of my favorites is the array described by Craven, Lawe and Travis in: Microphone arrays using tangential velocity sensors P.G. Craven, C. Travis, M.J. Law We introduce a new class of 3D microphone arrays that use symmetrical arrangements of tangential velocity sensors. Use of velocity sensors allows these arrays to recover spherical harmonics of a given degree with less low-frequency boost than when using pressure sensors only. As an example we present a symmetrical array of twelve velocity sensors that resolves the eight harmonics of degrees 1 and 2. A second-order spherical microphone can now be constructed by combining this array with one or more pressure sensors that provide the missing harmonic of degree 0. http://ambisonics.iem.at/symposium2009/proceedings/ambisym09-craventravis-tangentialsphmic.pdf/at_download/file The other practical method for constructing an array that produces higher order spherical harmonic outputs is to use a group of omnidirectional microphones on a sphere, such as the commercially available Eigenmike: http://www.mhacoustics.com/products There are other methods. It's still early days for this technology. Eric Benjamin -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131122/1436acf9/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
�David Pickett d...@fugato.com�wrote: How does one record in third order (or indeed any order above first order)?�� What kind of microphone array does one need, for instance, for 3rd order with no height information (WXYUVPQ)?� Is there a native format method for HOA or is it all extended A format, with conversion through matrices? I don't dispute Eric's very short, but very full summary but I think we may be at cross purposes. Richard Furse's software obviously works with a higher order microphone (if anyone has one) but I would suggest his primary motivation was for synthesised higher order soundfields. You can obviously create a synthetic soundfield of any order you want. Michael All excellent questions. �It is not quite as obvious how to record any order of Ambisonics above first order. �It will require some sort of microphone array and post-processing. �One of my favorites is the array described by Craven, Lawe and Travis in: Microphone arrays using tangential velocity sensors P.G. Craven, C. Travis, M.J. Law We introduce a new class of 3D microphone arrays that use symmetrical arrangements of tangential velocity sensors.� Use of velocity sensors allows these arrays to recover spherical harmonics of a given degree with less low-frequency boost than when using pressure sensors only.� As an example we present a symmetrical array of twelve velocity sensors that resolves the eight harmonics of degrees 1 and 2.� A second-order spherical microphone can now be constructed by combining this array with one or more pressure sensors that provide the missing harmonic of degree 0. http://ambisonics.iem.at/symposium2009/proceedings/ambisym09-craventravis-tangentialsphmic.pdf/at_download/file The other practical method for constructing an array that produces higher order spherical harmonic outputs is to use a group of omnidirectional microphones on a sphere, such as the commercially available Eigenmike: http://www.mhacoustics.com/products There are other methods. �It's still early days for this technology. Eric Benjamin -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131122/1436acf9/attachment.html ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins
Hi Is there any technical problems in using third order processing with only first order data ? If I remember correctly it should not be a problem? Only the overhead of having 12 unused tracks in the reaper layout? Nice of you to promote Ambisonics by offering the basic plugins for free. Thank you Bo-Erik Sandholm Sweden -Original Message- From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Richard Furse Sent: den 21 november 2013 14:14 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: [Sursound] New Ambisonic VST Plugins Hi there! In case folk aren't aware, the TOA (Third Order Ambisonic) VST plugins from Blue Ripple Sound have been released, along with some other bits and pieces. They are intended primarily for use with Reaper (Cubase/Nuendo currently can't host them). More details can be found at http://www.blueripplesound.com/story/new-toa-plugins. Best wishes, --Richard ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
