On Feb 11, 2012, at 1:00 AM, Ross Bencina wrote:
>
>
> On 11/02/2012 2:27 PM, Jerry wrote:
>> Glad to help. With your set-up, if you try to put a loud low frequency
>> signal well outside the loudspeaker array, you will notice that your
>> speakers and/or amplifiers will have melted. To the e
Mr Syreeni, this is like the worst cliff hanger for me. Please sort
this out asap!
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Emanuel Landeholm
wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
>> On 2012-02-09, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
>>
>>> I was just reacting to the oxymoronic juxtaposit
On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 12:11 AM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> On 2012-02-09, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
>
>> I was just reacting to the oxymoronic juxtaposition of two blatant
>> opposites. And no.. I wasn't thinking in the Fourier domain. It's a complex
>> rotation in time domain analytic signal.
>
>
>
On 2012-02-09, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
I was just reacting to the oxymoronic juxtaposition of two blatant
opposites. And no.. I wasn't thinking in the Fourier domain. It's a
complex rotation in time domain analytic signal.
That is then equivalent to a *very* narrow band complex multiplicatio
On 11/02/2012 2:27 PM, Jerry wrote:
Glad to help. With your set-up, if you try to put a loud low frequency signal
well outside the loudspeaker array, you will notice that your speakers and/or
amplifiers will have melted. To the extent that sin(theta_A) = theta_A
(small-angle approximation),
On Feb 9, 2012, at 11:48 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
>
>
> On 9/02/2012 11:02 AM, Jerry wrote:
>> (Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
>>
>> Benjamin B. Bauer, Phasor Analysis of Some Stereophonic Phenomena, IRE
>> Transactions on Audio, January-February, 1962.
>
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 8:48 AM, Ross Bencina
wrote:
>
> On 9/02/2012 11:02 AM, Jerry wrote:
>>
>> (Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
...
>> Sin theta_I (S_l - S_r)
>> --- = ---
>> Sin theta_A (S_l + S_r)
>
> Solving for S_l^2 + S_r^2 = 1 it
On 9/02/2012 11:02 AM, Jerry wrote:
(Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
Benjamin B. Bauer, Phasor Analysis of Some Stereophonic Phenomena, IRE
Transactions on Audio, January-February, 1962.
This panning law is mentioned in many introductory books on stereo
> Ross Bencina wrote:
>
> In this instance I'm not really concerned with psychoacoustics. What I
> need is something that gives a sensible result under the assumption that
> I want to send some anti-phase in the opposite speaker. "Sensible" could
> be defined as "perceptually smooth", or "energy s
Ross, There is an .amh file that allows you to do what you want rather
easily. Go to ambiophonics.org/PCMac.html and scroll down, way down, to see
the contraptions used and how to set their controls to get what you want.
The key element is your ping pong gizmo. Basically you feed in say a left
on
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 6:21 AM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
> On 2012-02-08, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
>
>>> simple complex rotation
>>
>>
>> Wait... What did I just write? o_O
>
>
> You thought it just right. You were just working in the Fourier domain,
> weren't you? ;)
I was just reacting to the oxymo
On Feb 8, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
> Hi Jerry,
>
> On 9/02/2012 11:02 AM, Jerry wrote:
>> (Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
>>
>> Benjamin B. Bauer, Phasor Analysis of Some Stereophonic Phenomena, IRE
>> Transactions on Audio, January-February
Hi Jerry,
On 9/02/2012 11:02 AM, Jerry wrote:
(Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
Benjamin B. Bauer, Phasor Analysis of Some Stereophonic Phenomena, IRE
Transactions on Audio, January-February, 1962.
If anyone knows where this can be read without forking ov
On 2012-02-08, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
simple complex rotation
Wait... What did I just write? o_O
You thought it just right. You were just working in the Fourier domain,
weren't you? ;)
--
Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front
+358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 0
On 2012-02-08, Emanuel Landeholm wrote:
Is this how it's done in Dolby?
In Dolby, the encoder is an analog approximation to a wide-band 90
degree phase shift. But it's very much an approximation, and it's also
about approximating a relative shift, not an absolute one. The filters
go pretty
On 2012-02-08, Ross Bencina wrote:
Ambisonics uses anti-phase panning.
Fully, at the low frequencies, and a controlled amount of it higher up.
Yes.
What if we assume that the speakers are on either side of the head.
Then you are assuming something beyond the conventional ambisonic
decod
On 2012-02-07, Olli Niemitalo wrote:
You could cook up something from the Dolby Stereo mixing matrix, but
the implementation is going to need a Hilbert transformer.
Pretty much any simple implementation is going to need one. Any higher
end one in the fully digital domain is going to require a
(Good grief, people.) You want the *very famous* Bauer's Law of Sines:
Benjamin B. Bauer, Phasor Analysis of Some Stereophonic Phenomena, IRE
Transactions on Audio, January-February, 1962.
This panning law is mentioned in many introductory books on stereo theory.
Here it is, quoting from the pa
On 08/02/2012 16:25, Theo Verelst wrote:
> left = cos 0 * Re - sin 0 * Im = Re
> right = sin theta * Re + cos theta * Im
It sometimes amazes me where people learn all this ..., though I
partially know the answer.
How can you take the Real and imaginary part of a general audio signal,
really,
> Sorry, no proper EE background here tho. I'm just a math geek. :-)
Auw man
--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp
links
http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp
http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/li
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Theo Verelst wrote:
>> left = cos 0 * Re - sin 0 * Im = Re
>> right = sin theta * Re + cos theta * Im
>
> It sometimes amazes me where people learn all this ..., though I partially
> know the answer.
>
> How can you take the Real and imaginary part of a general audi
> left = cos 0 * Re - sin 0 * Im = Re
> right = sin theta * Re + cos theta * Im
It sometimes amazes me where people learn all this ..., though I
partially know the answer.
How can you take the Real and imaginary part of a general audio signal,
really, will somebody *with* a proper Electrical
I didn't see this idea mentioned. Maybe the idea was already mentioned or
perhaps the idea is inappropriate to the task at hand.
Sometime long ago I experimented with panning by adding a very small delay to
one channel, in addition to the channel volume scaling. That would be similar to
phase
On 9/02/2012 1:17 AM, Olli Niemitalo wrote:
1 + g(p) = 2*f(p)
==> g(p) = 2*f(p) - 1
For a chorus voice, as channel gains, use g(p) = 2f(p) - 1 and g(-p)
= 2f(-p) - 1, where p = -1..1 is the panning and f(p) is a vanilla
panning law of your choice. This means that with g(p), you will have
to r
Ross, okay, I did not realize you channel mix left and right in the
voices. I thought the panning was simply different gains in the two
channels, possibly negative in one channel for the "extreme" effect.
-olli
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Ross Bencina wrote:
>
>
> On 9/02/2012 1:06 AM, Olli
On 9/02/2012 1:06 AM, Olli Niemitalo wrote:
Now, it would be unreasonable if, compared to input, the
output would have an opposite polarity in L or R.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here, for example, the following is
reasonable:
Considering the left channel only (right is opposite an
Oopsy, correcting from the previously 3-row equation:
1 + g(p) = 2*f(p)
==> g(p) = 2*f(p) - 1
For a chorus voice, as channel gains, use g(p) = 2f(p) - 1 and g(-p)
= 2f(-p) - 1, where p = -1..1 is the panning and f(p) is a vanilla
panning law of your choice. This means that with g(p), you will hav
Knowing that you're panning chorus voices to be summed with the input
signal gives something to work on.
Let's say there's just one chorus voice and someone sets up the
delays, volume and whatnot so that it is actually identical to the
input signal. Now, it would be unreasonable if, compared to in
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Emanuel Landeholm
wrote:
> simple complex rotation
Wait... What did I just write? o_O
--
dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website:
subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp
links
http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-
It think it's first explained in the patent US4577305 issued March 18, 1986:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=CcI2EBAJ
>From the patent:
LT = L + 0.7 C - 0.7 j S
RT = R + 0.7 C + 0.7 j S
There, by j they mean a 90 degree phase shift, L, R, C, S are left,
right, center, surround, and T
Lol! Actually, when reading the OP the first thought that went through
my head was "Hilbert transformer". So I scanned the thread, and sure
enough...
It would seem that once you have an analytic signal, all you need to
do is to apply a simple complex rotation with a phase offset for the
second cha
Thanks for the responses,
Seems like I may have asked the wrong question.
Ralph Glasgal wrote:
> There is no valid psychoacoustic method to accomplish this and so
> there can be no valid pan laws to accomplish this.
In this instance I'm not really concerned with psychoacoustics. What I
need is
From: Richard Dobson
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 10:17 PM
To: A discussion list for music-related DSP
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Unless I am completely mixing this up with some other system, I recall
some demo soundfile you posted some while back (must have been via
sursoun
music-related DSP
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Unless I am completely mixing this up with some other system, I recall
some demo soundfile you posted some while back (must have been via
sursound) using two adjacent speakers, and getting a
quasi-surround/widening effect. I recall
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Ross Bencina
wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Does anyone know if there's a "standard" way to calculate pan laws for
> stereo-wide panning ?
>
> By "stereo-wide" I mean panning something beyond the speakers by using
> 180-degree shifted signal in the opposite speaker.
Yo
Unless I am completely mixing this up with some other system, I recall
some demo soundfile you posted some while back (must have been via
sursound) using two adjacent speakers, and getting a
quasi-surround/widening effect. I recall it particularly, because just
using my two toy Apple speakers e
Richard Dobson
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 9:03 AM
To: A discussion list for music-related DSP
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Otherwise, you are looking at hrtf plus crosstalk cancellation (some
techniques such as ambiophonics claim to be able to create the sense of
full
...@music.columbia.edu
[mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Ross Bencina
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:21 AM
To: A discussion list for music-related DSP
Subject: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone know if there's a "standard" way to calculate pan l
#x27;d just use the same law as for the front/left/right
(which could be any), only with shifting for the lower half of the circle.
-Message d'origine- From: Ross Bencina
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:20 AM
To: A discussion list for music-related DSP
Subject: [music-dsp] stereo-wi
L = ((1+w)L + (1-w)R)/2
R = ((1+w)R + (1-w)L)/2
0<=w<=2
0 = mono
1 = normal
2 = full wide
Tom
On 07-Feb-12 11:20, Ross Bencina wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone know if there's a "standard" way to calculate pan laws for
stereo-wide panning ?
By "stereo-wide" I mean panning something beyond t
fting for the lower half of the circle.
-Message d'origine-
From: Ross Bencina
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 11:20 AM
To: A discussion list for music-related DSP
Subject: [music-dsp] stereo-wide pan law?
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone know if there's a "standard" wa
Hi Everyone,
Does anyone know if there's a "standard" way to calculate pan laws for
stereo-wide panning ?
By "stereo-wide" I mean panning something beyond the speakers by using
180-degree shifted signal in the opposite speaker. For example, for
"beyond hard left" you would output full gain s
42 matches
Mail list logo
