before, at least I have some strange déjà vu
feeling here... :-)
Best,
Stefan Schreiber
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On 1 Nov 2012, at 23:07, Stefan Schreiber st
--On 02 November 2012 02:30 + Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt
wrote:
- Windows NT is partially based on C++.
I don't see based on - written in is not the same. NT was a rename of
OS/2 v3, the version being re-engineered for cross-machine compatibility by
MS (while IBM were
On 1 Nov 2012, at 17:00, sursound-requ...@music.vt.edu wrote:
i am wondering if we cannot produce HRTFs the way the first
produced spectacle lenses. one needs to look at the range of
variations in HRTFs and what actually varies from person to person
and produce a dozen or so hrtfs. people
On 1 Nov 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk wrote:
Download the binaural for binaural use, and the stereo for stereo use? - in
fact, instead of trying to make one format fit all - people could just
download a folder and extract the ones they needed...
That's an academic
Hi
On 2 November 2012 03:54, Alexis Shaw alexis.s...@gmail.com wrote:
For HRTF based sound, headphones work the best. The HRTF is the solution of
the in-head effects.
Actually, you simply can't guarantee that. To even get close to
guaranteeing that it will work for the majority head tracking
On 1 Nov 2012, at 22:30, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
Object Oriented programming was available 1978/1980. It wasn't used until
NeXT started pushing ObjC and SUN tried to rip it off unsuccessfully with
Java (which barely qualifies because for
On 1 Nov 2012, at 22:47, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
You're angry at reality. I'm not making these things up, nor do they
constitute my ideal world. But I'm willing to face the reality and ask which
small steps can we take to get from here to
On 1 Nov 2012, at 23:07, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
The next and valid question is if stereo via headphones actually works so
well at all... (Many people have problems, such as in-head effects, lack of
perceived real space, etc.)
If you would fix these problems, then
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
Object Oriented programming was available 1978/1980. It wasn't used until NeXT
started pushing ObjC and SUN tried to rip it off unsuccessfully with Java
(which barely qualifies because for several iterations of the language it
missed key elements of a real OOP
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:56, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Oh yes, go to Apple and look if they listen to your ideas, and let others do their stuff instead of doing
some promotion for some stylish, fahionable campany offering super slim
products.
Peter Lennox wrote:
Am I missing something? - for mobile use, wouldn't B-format to binaural be
better than UHJ?
Dr Peter Lennox
Yes, but then you didn't need a solution requiring the participation of
mighty Apple... ;-)
Best,
Stefan
Peter Lennox wrote:
Download the binaural for binaural use, and the stereo for stereo use? - in
fact, instead of trying to make one format fit all - people could just download
a folder and extract the ones they needed...
Dr. Peter Lennox
I already wrote this. Of course, you put this into
Richard Dobson wrote:
The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear
stereo as stereo. If the response to lack of perfection is always
do nothing, nothing will be done. Alternatively, if you use those
generic HRTFs, at least ~some~ people will be happy.
BTW, the AES
For HRTF based sound, headphones work the best. The HRTF is the solution of
the in-head effects.
On 2 November 2012 14:07, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Richard Dobson wrote:
The same is true of stereo too. There are people who just don't hear
stereo as stereo. If the
...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On
Behalf Of Ronald C.F. Antony
Sent: 30 October 2012 18:14
To: Surround Sound discussion group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
On 30 Oct 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk wrote:
Am I missing
Peter Lennox wrote:
Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
skip the uhj altogether?
Please, what is this generic binaural?
Everyone has an individual HRTF. If you
release binaural recording using a generic
HRTF then it will work for some and not for
This is absolutely true. My late first wife
heard stereo as two separate speakers no
matter how well the speakers worked for others.
She liked mono a lot better.
Surround sound was a n ightmare from her viewpoint--
all those speakers playing from different directions
each on heard individually.
If the response to lack of perfection is always do nothing,
nothing will be done.
Which perfectly explains why we don't have an accepted ambisonic file
format. No one is willing to accept limitations... and it is so easy
to find limitations in formats.
I firmly believe that a successful
Sent from my mobile phone
On 31 Oct 2012, at 07:08, Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk wrote:
Yes but...why not simply release stuff for mobiles in a generic binaural -
skip the uhj altogether?
Because you also want to listen to the same piece on your home and car stereo?
Ronald
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
This is absolutely true. My late first wife
heard stereo as two separate speakers no
matter how well the speakers worked for others.
She liked mono a lot better.
Surround sound was a n ightmare from her viewpoint--
all those
Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression messes up
phase relationships, and that would be an issue for things like UHJ, which as
long as portable stereo players with limited battery life (and thus limited
CPUs), is the only viable, because stereo compatible,
...@music.vt.edu [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf
Of Richard Lee [rica...@justnet.com.au]
Sent: 30 October 2012 19:51
To: 'Surround Sound discussion group'
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression
From: Richard Lee rica...@justnet.com.au
To: 'Surround Sound discussion group' sursound@music.vt.edu
Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2012, 19:51
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Patent application: Data structure for HOA
Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked
Richard Lee wrote:
Take your favourite Nimbus UHJ CD and
rip it using the most evil MP3 encoder you can find
Sorry, slightly off-topic, but still:
Some people have done terrible data reduction to UHJ recordings already:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnvRtM5WDsc
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:42, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Ronald, most if not all (classical) recordings where I am participating are
done in a way that they could be issued in 5.1 (or say 5.0) surround, namely
several Pentatone recordings, and even the more recent
On 30 Oct 2012, at 06:24, Peter Lennox p.len...@derby.ac.uk wrote:
Am I missing something? - for mobile use, wouldn't B-format to binaural be
better than UHJ?
Dr Peter Lennox
Of course it would. Do you know of a mobile playback device with multi-channel
audio support, multi-channel audio
On 29 Oct 2012, at 20:56, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
Oh yes, go to Apple and look if they listen to your ideas, and let others do
their stuff instead of doing some promotion for some stylish, fahionable
campany offering super slim products.
You make my point: they won't
--On 28 October 2012 20:00 -0700 Robert Greene gre...@math.ucla.edu wrote:
I think compressed surround stuff is a nonstarter
in the real world. You would be looking for
a person who cared a lot about surround but
did not give a darn about sound quality. I doubt
that there are many such!
DTS
On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the re-surrection of UHJ. Simple 2
channels will remain the most important distribution format in the forseable
future.
This is real surround sound? Why not Dolby Surround...:-D
On 28 Oct 2012, at 03:11, Richard Lee rica...@justnet.com.au wrote:
This will be a lossy compressed format probably based on the public domain
Vorbis.
Unless things have changed a lot, last I checked lossy compression messes up
phase relationships, and that would be an issue for things like
Here! Here! (Goes back under stone. Now, where's my old Minim and my relatively
uncompressed CD's?)
On 29 Oct 2012, at 14:28, Ronald C.F. Antony r...@cubiculum.com wrote:
On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the
At this point in time, not only is most music listened on mobile devices,
most music is even purchased on mobile devices, and that's strictly a stereo
(or maybe binaural) world.
With a custom iPhone/Android app that employs headtracking (+
headsets) on iPhone/Android devices ... you have a
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 28 Oct 2012, at 22:34, Stefan Schreiber st...@mail.telepac.pt wrote:
When Ambi VLC happens, I predict the re-surrection of UHJ. Simple 2 channels
will remain the most important distribution format in the forseable future.
This is real surround sound?
Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
On 29 Oct 2012, at 18:47, etienne deleflie edelef...@gmail.com wrote:
At this point in time, not only is most music listened on mobile devices, most
music is even purchased on mobile devices, and that's strictly a stereo (or
maybe binaural) world.
With a
Hi Richard,
Yes, what it does, it does very well. However, as described, you are asked
to first create an n-channel interleaved WAVE file containing all those
uncompressed silent channels, and pass that to wavpack. Which is fine in
principle, except that with a possibly large number of
On 28/10/2012 23:12, etienne deleflie wrote:
Hi Richard,
..
The 4GB limit has been considered within UA.
The wavpack format itself has the limit of 2^32 samples, which
translates to 27 hours at 44 kHz (or 1 hour of 27 channels at 44kHz).
The users who have been emailing me are all working
I think no serious person in audio wants anything to do
with lossy compression which is a commercial compromise
for no real reason(uncompressed audio no longer
looks like that big a file). Since probably
no one is interested in exotic surround items
except people who are serious about audio,
I received a message back from Jan-Mark Batke, to the effect they will
pass my comments on to the patent authorities. It is classified at this
stage as a disclosure. The four inventors are members of Technicolor,
and the new system is briefly featured here:
As I've said ad nauseum, the guy who first integrates an Ambi decoder into VLC,
getting around the evil Windoz mixer etc. gets to choose the data structure for
next important Ambi format.
This will be a lossy compressed format probably based on the public domain
Vorbis.
Ambisonia was the 1st
Please not! He who is happy with lossy compression is hardly a candidate to
have a properly set up surround system, much less one suitable to Ambisonics.
Lossless compression is OK, even desired, as an option, preferably something
that's freely licensed and enjoys commercial support e.g. ALAC
Hi Richard,
Now the attention in previous posts was very much on the phrase most
sophisticated format, which was guaranteed to wind people up; whereas the
key word is really available. The UA format is not really available to
~composers~ to use. The description is very much one for
I suspect that
- any file format that has any level of sophistication (read:
complexity) will likely not get take-up (maybe even UA is too complex.
Straight old B-format is fine). Its not what features are included
that counts that's the engineer's mistake.
- any file format which can't
Hi,
Just noticed this the other day:
WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012059385
I haven't read all the 75 pages, mostly looking at the pictures :-)
But it looks like it's about combining different
Hi,
Just noticed this the other day:
WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
http://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2012059385
I haven't read all the 75 pages, mostly looking at the pictures :-)
Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
But it looks
Hi
On 24 October 2012 09:37, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote:
Hi,
Just noticed this the other day:
WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
Well it's Thomson and the inventors include people like Johann-Markus
Batke and
Hi
On 24 October 2012 09:37, Michael Chapman s...@mchapman.com wrote:
Hi,
Just noticed this the other day:
WO2012059385 DATA STRUCTURE FOR HIGHER ORDER AMBISONICS AUDIO DATA
Who is/are the applicant(s) ?
Well it's Thomson and the inventors include people like Johann-Markus
Batke and
Interesting (in its way), looks like a combo of HOA Ambisonic scene
description (using multiple HOA streams possibly of different orders)
and bandwidth compression; i.e. there is an encoding and decoding device
as part of the application, as there would need to be, given that
patents
The B-Format (based on the extensible ^iff/wav' structure) with its
*.amb file format realisation as described as of 30 March 2009 for
example in Martin Leese, File Format for B-Format , http://www.
ambisonia.com/Members/etienne/Members/mleese/file-format-for-b-format,
is the most
Hmm, well, that rather proves my point, and I will write to them. I have
every confidence that that sentence was written ironically rather than
hagiographically. Suffice it to say, I, Richard Dobson, did that work in
2000; and it appears the title to even that very modest piece of IP
(embodied
Hi,
Richard Dobson wrote:
I guess I haven't played the system well enough - as the person who
first published the amb format (not in 2009 but in 2000, in my paper
for
ICMC Berlin) it would have been a nice addition to my meagre CV to
have
been mentioned in a patent application. Perhaps I
Richard Dobson wrote:
...
So is this, in fact, the ultimate file format that folk on this list
have been arguing for (and over) for so long?
No, absolutely not. The fact that it has been
patented means that it should not be used.
The situation is similar the the GIF image file
format. When
So is this, in fact, the ultimate file format that folk on this list have
been arguing for (and over) for so long?
I dont know about ultimate formats ... but one existing format is
Universal Ambisonic (UA). It is documented Here:
http://soundofspace.com/static/make_ua_file
And there is lots of
52 matches
Mail list logo
