Hello David,
This sounds great! Congrats in getting the resources together to make this
happen.
I see there have been a number of comments regarding possible set ups--I'll add
a few thoughts here as I've been thinking about putting together a 2nd order
system. I was thinking of something alon
Fons Adriaensen a écrit :
>On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>> On 03/24/2011 09:21 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>>
>>> With just 2 more speakers (4 + 6 + 4 + 1) you would not only have
>>> better first order but also the option to reproduce in full 2nd
>>> order
oops I sent a wrong mail to the group.. furthermore in italian .-)
Thank you for your advices and time Jorn,
we'll keep these concerns in mind, and will discuss the various arrays' options
with colleagues here...
.. now running
best,
David
> On 03/24/2011 04:15 PM, david monac
Eugenio,
ti giro anche questa, teniamola lì per quando dovremo prendere la decisione..
questo è uno in gamba..
david
> On 03/24/2011 04:15 PM, david monacchi wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> we're planning to build in Pesaro-Italy a small ambisonic studio with
>> 13 loudspeakers (full 3D - 4@-45°, 4@0°
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 10:11:15PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> On 03/24/2011 10:02 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>> out of curiosity: in what way is such a layout superiour to a
>>> dodecahedron (with speakers on the faces,
On 03/24/2011 10:02 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
out of curiosity: in what way is such a layout superiour to a
dodecahedron (with speakers on the faces, not the vertices)?
It's marginally better for horizontal directions, and wo
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> On 03/24/2011 09:21 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>
>> With just 2 more speakers (4 + 6 + 4 + 1) you would not only have
>> better first order but also the option to reproduce in full 2nd
>> order - assuming the right decoder.
>
> o
On 03/24/2011 09:21 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
With just 2 more speakers (4 + 6 + 4 + 1) you would not only have
better first order but also the option to reproduce in full 2nd
order - assuming the right decoder.
out of curiosity: in what way is such a layout superiour to a
dodecahedron (with
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 04:15:22PM +0100, david monacchi wrote:
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> we're planning to build in Pesaro-Italy a small ambisonic studio with 13
> loudspeakers (full 3D - 4@-45°, 4@0°, 4@+45°, 1@90°).. We're now in the
> process of moving walls, treating acoustically the room, etc.
and to add to this, I can say that Jorn's examples in the SPIRAL were the first
one to really convince me of the value of ambisonics... I always had bad
decoders and/or low order experiences, and there was some clever filter design
in a 3rd order setting... fantastic!
p
Le 2011-03-24 à 18:40, J
On 03/24/2011 04:15 PM, david monacchi wrote:
Dear all,
we're planning to build in Pesaro-Italy a small ambisonic studio with
13 loudspeakers (full 3D - 4@-45°, 4@0°, 4@+45°, 1@90°)..
knowing your field-recording work, i can see how you'd focus on first
order, but i can't help noticing how 12
Dear all,
we're planning to build in Pesaro-Italy a small ambisonic studio with 13
loudspeakers (full 3D - 4@-45°, 4@0°, 4@+45°, 1@90°).. We're now in the process
of moving walls, treating acoustically the room, etc.. The room will be 5.00 x
4.60 x 3.20h and we are planning to treat it to be
12 matches
Mail list logo
