Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-10 Thread Stefan Schreiber
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-09 Thread Politis Archontis
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,

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-09 Thread Paul Hodges
--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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this

2016-04-08 Thread len moskowitz
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread umashankar manthravadi
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Marc Lavallee
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:

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Bo-Erik Sandholm
Multi direction binaurals?s? http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/T-H-E-Audio/BS-3D Or beamforming ? http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp==5346535=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplore.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5346535 http://www.mhacoustics.com/products Bo-Erik On 8 Apr 2016 16:06,

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread John Leonard
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread David Pickett
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread umashankar manthravadi
du> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this? On Fri, 8 Apr 2016 13:00:20 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@stackingdwarves.net> wrote : > On 04/07/2016 08:13 PM, Marc Lavallee wrote: > > > > The FAQ says: > > "audio is recorded in 96 KHz/16

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Marc Lavallée
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-08 Thread Jörn Nettingsmeier
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-07 Thread Marc Lavallee
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

Re: [Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-07 Thread Charlie Richmond
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/ > >

[Sursound] Anyone know anything about this?

2016-04-07 Thread John Leonard
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