Interesting
http://hackaday.com/2013/05/22/adding-stereo-to-monophonic-audio/
-Original Message-
From: Hack a Day [mailto:comment-re...@wordpress.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 8:00 AM
Subject: [New post] Adding stereo to monophonic audio
Post : Adding stereo to
http://people.ece.cornell.edu/land/courses/ece5030/FinalProjects/s2013/pmd68
_ecs227_hl577/pmd68_ecs227_hl577/index.html
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130522/76dfcc33
No. But the fact that a hall sounds
anechoic or nearly so does not mean it is!
To the extent that I could find out on line
in a quick search, it seems that the
reverb time was about 1.4 seconds. This
is much too short to sound satisfactory and
moreover the rise of RT in the bass was
not
Hi Ray,
On 05/22/2013 01:24 AM, revery wrote:
Hello jörn,
Thinking about what you say here, is this working by having pure M
from the front and S from 90 degrees to the side, effectively
'mixing' the M S signals in the air as they reach the ears/brain?
(Maybe I'm thinking about this too much,
Hi
I seem to remember reading a review of kit that could do this - and/or
construct 5.1 from stereo - aimed at TV broadcasters. That was just a
couple of years ago - not the inverse comb filter system that was sometimes
(mis)used to convert mono to stereo in the early days of stereo records.
Sorry! I read the wrong volume! RFH is actually 21,960.
This gives critical distance ~ 7 meters.
(not that this changes my basic point but just for the record)
Robert
On Wed, 22 May 2013, Robert Greene wrote:
No. But the fact that a hall sounds
anechoic or nearly so does not mean it is!
To
Didn't Lauridsen propose and experiment with
stereo playback done this way--with a mono signal
in the center and a diffference signal produced by a edgeon mounted
dipole?
Robert
On Wed, 22 May 2013, J?rn Nettingsmeier wrote:
Hi Ray,
On 05/22/2013 01:24 AM, revery wrote:
Hello j?rn,
