PS Leaving my own evaluation aside, one of the things
I have noticed about this type of recording is that there
is a direct connection between how much people like it
and how familiar they are with the actual sound of the
particular orchestra in the particular hall.
I did not have contact with
On 04/02/2012 08:37 PM, Eric Benjamin wrote:
I believe that the glockenspiel effect that you describe arises because the
localization cues experienced by the listener are different for ITDs than for
ILDs. Because we primarily rely on ITDs at low frequencies and ILDs at high
frequencies, if the
Ten days ago, I made an archive recording of Birmingham Opera's presentation of
Jonathan Dove's new work, Life Is A Dream at a disused factory: the orchestra
were in a fixed position, but the performers, including a 100-strong amateur
chorus, and the audience, moved around the space. I was very
Hi Robert,
Umm - I was making exactly the opposite point - invented in the
16th century makes it, as far as music is concerned, a very new
concept. On the other hand,when talking about acoustic _concert_
music, it's almost tautologous that they are frontally presented,
because the whole
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 09:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Robert Greene gre...@math.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Can anyone help with my dissertation please?
To: Surround Sound discussion group sursound@music.vt.edu
Message-ID:
I have to agree with this - at least, to some extent. One of the best
recordings, in the sense of most enjoyable to me when I listened back
to it, I ever did with the York Waits was one of the ones we did at
the marvellous Bossal Church near York. It had to my ears a perfect
balance of the
So I am nervously edging towards the following conclusions :
1. Music can be mixed ambisonically and then decoded or bounced
down to Speaker configurations like 5.1, 7.1 ,1100.12 , stereo
whatever.
2. This can all be done with software - there is no need for
specialist decoders or hardware -
On 2 Apr 2012, at 23:48, newme...@aol.com wrote:
No whiz-bang demos will make any difference! Ambisonics is what people
are doing on this list and that's just as it should be -- PLAYING with
*sound* with our friends!
Whiz-bang demos won't make any difference, but adoption by Apple's
On 3 Apr 2012, at 07:31, Jörn Nettingsmeier netti...@stackingdwarves.net
wrote:
On 04/02/2012 06:33 PM, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 2 Apr 2012, at 17:57, Eero Aroeero@dlc.fi wrote:
Because Nimbus Records devoted themselves strictly to one point
miking, they didn't record any
I understand that, which is why I made the snide remark about ticket
sales. To place an microphone at audience level, one would have to empty
enough seats around the mic position to make neighbors a non-issue. But
revenues trump everything.
Similarly, they could do a recording while doing
On 3 Apr 2012, at 16:21, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote:
Oh, but the labour of transporting 100 manequins in fur coats
into the concert hall to get the acoustics right.
Much better to hope the concert attracts the correct socio-
economic class ( ... mink ... ) ... and the hall is
I've always assumed that frontal, proscenium arch -type presentations came out
of the logistics of clocking large numbers of musicians together - generally
using a visual cue in the form of a conductor (also, individual musicians might
feel a bit lonely if they can't hang out with their mates)
they in the future?
Mark Stahlman
Brooklyn NY
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120403/84161fca/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
On 3 Apr 2012, at 16:52, newme...@aol.com wrote:
Ronald:
Whiz-bang demos won't make any difference, but
adoption by Apple's iTunes Store, or something like
that would make a difference.
Very interesting! Does iTunes currently support multi-channel audio
(other than on purchased
.
___
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/20120403/3448f07b/attachment.html
I would fear an applelization of ambisonics. Apple could impose its
own ok format (probably as a CAF chunk specification) with patents
and lock-ins, because it's a common practice in the audio industry. Not
everything in this world needs to be mainstream (but that's just my
opinion).
Ronald C.F.
On Apr 1, 2012, at 9:51 PM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 04/01/2012 09:05 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
again to anyone who says things like ambisonics cant compete with 5.1
please bear in mind this is like saying amplitude panning can't
compete with 5.1 - it doesnt make any sense at all. You
--
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120403/3448f07b/attachment.html
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
I agree. My appeal for material to listen to
was not intended as a call to get Apple to take
over. The blood curdles.
Robert
On Tue, 3 Apr 2012, Marc Lavall?e wrote:
I would fear an applelization of ambisonics. Apple could impose its
own ok format (probably as a CAF chunk specification) with
On 3 Apr 2012, at 18:03, Marc Lavallée m...@hacklava.net wrote:
I would fear an applelization of ambisonics. Apple could impose its
own ok format (probably as a CAF chunk specification) with patents
and lock-ins, because it's a common practice in the audio industry. Not
everything in this
Hi
What about Apple lossless compression, Quicktime - and so on?
Tony
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
On
Behalf Of Ronald C.F. Antony
Sent: 03 April 2012 20:06
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound]
Well, we don't need to get hyper-paranoid about it. Apple have defined
channel IDs for WXYZ, which goes no further than make it possible to
create a 1st-order CAF file. CAF is not closed, the spec is fully open
and documented. It is supported in libsndfile (along with AMB), among
other things.
The Apple lossless codec was made open-source last year.
Richard Dobson
On 03/04/2012 20:26, Rev Tony Newnham wrote:
Hi
What about Apple lossless compression, Quicktime - and so on?
Tony
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
Thanks everybody for the links and in particular the
calculation of models link. I shall work on that one
I know the Lipshitz paper well, but it seems that
experts disagree. James Johnston has told me
a number of times for example that he thinks
getting those time cues from ORTF is really
On 3 Apr 2012, at 21:26, Rev Tony Newnham revtonynewn...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
What about Apple lossless compression, Quicktime - and so on?
Apple has no history of pushing proprietary file formats, except for DRM.
Apple Lossless is fully published:
http://alac.macosforge.org/
It's
On 3 Apr 2012, at 22:15, Richard Dobson richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
The Apple lossless codec was made open-source last year.
Some people might as: why was it not published earlier?
To that I'd answer:
- legal issues: a company like Apple has huge potential legal liabilities.
On 2012-04-03, Richard Dobson wrote:
Well, we don't need to get hyper-paranoid about it. Apple have defined
channel IDs for WXYZ, which goes no further than make it possible to
create a 1st-order CAF file.
Agreed. And whatever ambisonic related patents there are for first
order, they will
On 04/04/2012 00:13, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
On 2012-04-03, Richard Dobson wrote:
Well, we don't need to get hyper-paranoid about it. Apple have defined
channel IDs for WXYZ, which goes no further than make it possible to
create a 1st-order CAF file.
Agreed. And whatever ambisonic related
At 08:49 03/04/2012, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
Frankly, I have ZERO interest in 2nd and higher-order Ambisonics,
because anything beyond a 5.1/4.0 setup is impractical in any home
listening environment for 90%+ of consumers, particularly if the
speakers and amps are supposed to be of a quality
On 04/04/2012 00:13, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
..
So why *not* do it, since it's really, really good even on the minimum
four speakers?
Good question. The answer is always given that first order is not good
enough. The perfect really is the enemy of the good, or the better. You
could call it
On 04/04/2012 00:54, Marc Lavallée wrote:
The CAF format is not patented, but there are patented file formats
like GIF, ASF or PDF.
Ah yes, I suppose those are the exceptions that prove the rule.
The general issue arises when a file format pretends to be a container
format but in fact
On 4 Apr 2012, at 01:13, Sampo Syreeni de...@iki.fi wrote:
Eric, could you tell us a little bit about the patent status of the CAF
implementation within libsndfile? And while we're at it, what would be tha
chance of getting some newer, purely open source format into the library, if
coded
At 14:01 02/04/2012, Aaron Heller wrote:
I put some files at
http://ambisonics.dreamhosters.com/DTS/
I downloaded, cut onto CD and listened to the finale of Brahms I,
which I have conducted several times (where was this recorded?). It
is the first time I have heard 4.0 from a CD and for
On 04/03/2012 03:16 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
4. More composers are starting to look at ambisonics though there is
still some resistance to it , mainly I think because its hard to get
your head around. I'm still trying to work out why stereo diffusion
into multiple speakers is more popular to
34 matches
Mail list logo
