://etiennedeleflie.net
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120331/b51f6266/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu
Richard Dobson wrote:
My own assumption when first discovering Ambsonics (public concert by
electric Phoenix, and later via CDP, from the late 80s) was that it was
purposed towards use in public diffusion
Rob Alexander describes the beginnings of Ambisonics in Gerzon's biography:
One of the things that is emerging here is(dare I say so)
that Ambisonics for music at home is just not such a good idea.
Attractive though it is mathematically--and it is very much that--
it is really impractical for home music.
Perhaps it is worthwhile to think for a moment about why.
My
On 03/31/2012 04:35 AM, Robert Greene wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
The revival of the past ten years or so is largely the result of
higher order becoming possible in practice, along with an interest
from telecom companies rather than music producers.
I am curious about
In addition to everything else that has been stated in this thread already, I
also believe we can think of consumer media technology as following two
diverging strands, in particular from the 80s onwards. One is the high fidelity
approach. High quality stereo reproduction systems, quadraphonic,
--
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120331/ef2bd671/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Hi,
This thread brings up several things that have been discussed
previously, and others have given good answers that cover why
ambisonics has failed to enter the mainstream.
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 19:23:04 +0100
From: Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk
I don't even think it has failed -
/sursound/attachments/20120331/b51f6266/attachment.html
--
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 10:44:11 +0100
From: Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?
To: Surround Sound discussion group sursound
At 05:30 31/03/2012, Eero Aro wrote:
The Soundfield microphone didn't attract sound engineers
because it was so expensive.
In my experience, early models were also very fussy regarding output
levels: either noisy or distorted. The expense kicks in when
professionally one needs more than
David Pickett wrote:
In my experience, early models were also very fussy regarding output
levels: either noisy or distorted.
As is common in Sursound, we are drifting out from the thread subject, but
yes, tell me news. I tried to use a SFM for dialogue recording in the
first half
of the
--
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120331/b4c73127/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
--On 31 March 2012 19:45 +0300 Eero Aro eero@dlc.fi wrote:
it is really too bad that the one place
where Ambisonics could help out in commonplace
daily life--namely, in how to mix stereo to three
(or more) frontal channels, that there is not a cheap
easy simple standalone unit to do just
--On 31 March 2012 12:53 -0400 newme...@aol.com wrote:
Music of the ordinary sort is in front . . .
Yes it is! Which is why Ambisonics makes *no* sense for the FRONT in a
musical reproduction system.
Music of the ordinary sort being the music that's in front, I guess,
making that a
At 14:04 31/03/2012, Eero Aro wrote:
David Pickett wrote:
In my experience, early models were also very fussy regarding output
levels: either noisy or distorted.
As is common in Sursound, we are drifting out from the thread subject
Not really drifting: this is a very good reason why the SF
At 14:33 31/03/2012, Paul Hodges wrote:
--On 31 March 2012 12:53 -0400 newme...@aol.com wrote:
Music of the ordinary sort is in front . . .
Yes it is! Which is why Ambisonics makes *no* sense for the FRONT in a
musical reproduction system.
Music of the ordinary sort being the music
David Pickett wrote:
One of the most exciting recordings I have is the Tallis
Scholars' later version of the Allegri Miserere
Here is another great performance and recording:
2L29SACD Ensemble 96 IMMORTAL NYSTEDT
http://www.2l.no/
Amazing! Not Ambisonics, not SFM.
Eero
Further to my last, Cara - can I suggest the following?
ask the members of the list here for specific criticisms of ambisonics -what
works, what doesn't work, what difficulties they encounter, how they might
improve things - both practical and fanciful. They are, after all, experts.
Such a
I did not say it should(be played in front)! It just is.
Of course there are instances when antiphonal effects
are used, and very well they can work too.
But I think that using this sort of thing as a way
to persuade people they ought to have 16 channels
of playback or something is wrong
18 matches
Mail list logo
