Okay, understood. In the course of thinking about this, I've come to
the idea that maybe the problem is with the whole concept of spreading
like this. When we localise a sound source, there's a lot of
information in the transients, which will, of course, have a different
spectral signature to the
At 11:49 02/06/2012, Dave Malham wrote:
Okay, understood. In the course of thinking about this, I've come to
the idea that maybe the problem is with the whole concept of spreading
like this. When we localise a sound source, there's a lot of
information in the transients, which will, of course,
On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 03:26:18PM +0100, Dave Malham wrote:
Have you compared the results of having separate X,Y,U,V,P,Q
filters to generate the panning (which is how I interpret what you say
above) with pre-filtering the sounds then panning the filter outputs?
Not sure if I understand
Hi Fons
On 30/05/2012 18:24, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:10:22PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote:
but anyone listening carefully would have heard a fly about 1 foot high !
This magnification effect has been reported many times.
I wonder how much it has to do with playing
-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On
Behalf Of Dave Malham
Sent: 31 May 2012 09:26
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Chasing flies with ambisoinics?
Hi Fons
On 30/05/2012 18:24, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:10
Hi Dave,
This magnification effect has been reported many times.
I wonder how much it has to do with playing back at too high
levels. We do associate LF energy and size. Too much of it
and the source 'must be' big.
That's certainly important - kind of the other end of the scale of quite
Hi Fons
On 31/05/2012 14:42, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
I did a small experiment a few weeks ago, and was quite surprised by the result. In a concert we
did at the CdS there were three pieces for solo flute and 'tape'. We got the 'tapes' as CDs of
course. The artistic director of the festival
Thats pretty similar to an example I heard the other day. A composer had
split the sound of a cello into different frequency bands and dispersed
them around a lot of loudspeakers (in a line if I remember correctly) each
one playing a different frequency - imagine his dissapointment when the
human
On 05/29/2012 08:24 PM, Bearcat M. Şandor wrote:
This touches on something i've wondered for a while now. Discrete surround
always sounds as though it's in a fixed ring to me. Sounds are always the same
distance away. I've experianced that with binaural recordings as well. Is there
a surround
This is also something I've been wondering about and trying to achieve in
sound installations. A fly landed on a microphone once when I was recording
in the jungle and when played back it sort of worked - sort of - but I do
think the cognitive visual factors (the sound installation was in a
One thing to bear in mind is that the perception of proximity is far easier to achieve with (fairly
rapidly) moving sources. If you get the changing patterns of simulated early reflections right, the
ear/brain will focus on the consistent cues (early reflections) and tend to ignore the
Wow - thats real startrek material right there Dave ! I was letting my
imagination wander in a similar area the other day and was wondering
if the beating/harmonics caused by two beams of electromagnetic waves
could somehow excite the air where their paths crossed causing a sound
to eminate from
] On
Behalf Of Augustine Leudar
Sent: 30 May 2012 15:18
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Chasing flies with ambisoinics?
Wow - thats real startrek material right there Dave ! I was letting my
imagination wander in a similar area the other day and was wondering
University of Derby, UK
tel: 01332 593155
e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk
-Original Message-
From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On
Behalf Of Augustine Leudar
Sent: 30 May 2012 15:18
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Chasing flies
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 02:10:22PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote:
but anyone listening carefully would have heard a fly about 1 foot high !
This magnification effect has been reported many times.
I wonder how much it has to do with playing back at too high
levels. We do associate LF energy and
Kind of already happening ! Not exactly a virtuoso performance but still
pretty cool :
Miniature flying robots play James Bond theme :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sUeGC-8dyk
No if we could just get the noise levels of the robots down and fix a small
speaker on their backs I think
Is there a surround sound method that will
reproduce actual depth enough so that you
could track the movment of a fly in a room?
A while back I started making a series of simultaneous binaural and 1st-order
soundfield recordings. The purpose is to compare them in reproduction, with a
The problem is, a sound sources as close to your ear as a mosquito is
essentially a mono signal on one ear, you practically hear nothing on the other
ear.
That's pretty much impossible to do with anything than a headphone setup, or
some phase cancelation while your head is clamped down such as
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 04:29:10PM + Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 03:51:10PM +0100, Augustine Leudar wrote:
Am I right in thinking the W component gives you enhanced distance
information for a given sound source ?
No. W is simply essential for anything Ambisonic to work
19 matches
Mail list logo
