Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 04/08/2016 04:26 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent
input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
restricting the word le
Just a note that direct beamforming is not necessarily worse than
encoding/decoding, it can be used for example to approximate in an optimal
(least-squares) sense the directional patterns of an ambisonic decoder for some
target speaker setup.
I haven’t met personally the people in the company,
--On 08 April 2016 18:14 +0200 Jörn Nettingsmeier
wrote:
> a casual glance over the site seems to suggest direct beamforming
> without an intermediate b-format.
But note, in the FAQ (under VR):
"Audio is recorded in the higher order ambisonic format which allows
precise representation of the 3D
John Leonard write:
This info came through from a colleague in the USA, although the
company appears to based in Poland.
http://audioimmersion.pl/
Anyone else been contacted?
I saw it at AES and am on their mailing list.
It has a rather large diameter.
Len Moskowitz (mosk
On 04/08/2016 04:26 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they know their equivalent
input noise is at 30 dB SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
restricting the word length to 96 dB is a perfectly r
On 04/08/2016 04:26 PM, Bo-Erik Sandholm wrote:
Multi direction binaurals?s?
http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/T-H-E-Audio/BS-3D
Or beamforming ?
a casual glance over the site seems to suggest direct beamforming
without an intermediate b-format.
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11,
They do mention ambisonics
umashankar
Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10
From: Marc Lavallee<mailto:m...@hacklava.net>
Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 7:57 PM
To: sursound@music.vt.edu<mailto:sursound@music.vt.edu>
Subject: Re: [Sur
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 15:13:16 +0200
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> On 04/08/2016 02:10 PM, Marc Lavallée wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
> > Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote :
> >
> >> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The FAQ says:
> >>> "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/
Multi direction binaurals?s?
http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/T-H-E-Audio/BS-3D
Or beamforming ?
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5346535&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5346535
http://www.mhacoustics.com/products
Bo-Erik
On 8 Apr
Well, according to the FAQ, anything and everything! The demo video just shows
two people sitting opposite one another with almost complete separation, but it
would seem that surround is also an option via software. Just out of interest,
I’ve applied to join the beta team, but haven’t heard anyt
At 15:13 08-04-16, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
They might have very pragmatic reasons: if they
know their equivalent input noise is at 30 dB
SPL and their capsules barf at 120, then
restricting the word length to 96 dB is a
perfectly reasonable decision, given the
extremely cramped space and
On 04/08/2016 02:10 PM, Marc Lavallée wrote:
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote :
On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
The FAQ says:
"audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather k
du>
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote :
> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >
> > The FAQ says:
> > "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >
> > I would
On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200,
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote :
> On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
> >
> > The FAQ says:
> > "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
> >
> > I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
>
> let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.
>
On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote:
The FAQ says:
"audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
let's not discuss matters of taste, but rather keep things scientific.
96/16 = 6
48/24 = 2
so theirs is clearly 3x better than yours!
(i held it during the
The FAQ says:
"audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16 bit quality"
I would prefer 48 KHz/24 bit.
--
Marc
On Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:00:14 -0700
Charlie Richmond wrote:
> First I've seen of it - looks interesting (not sure if it will sound
> interesting ;-)
>
> C-)
>
> On 7 April 2016 at 10:58, John Leo
First I've seen of it - looks interesting (not sure if it will sound
interesting ;-)
C-)
On 7 April 2016 at 10:58, John Leonard wrote:
> This info came through from a colleague in the USA, although the company
> appears to based in Poland.
>
> http://audioimmersion.pl/
>
> Anyone else been cont
This info came through from a colleague in the USA, although the company
appears to based in Poland.
http://audioimmersion.pl/
Anyone else been contacted?
Regards,
John
Please note new email address & direct line phone number
email: j...@johnleonard.uk
phone +44 (0)20 3286 5942
___
18 matches
Mail list logo