sub set for each order? In
which case not sure on the best sub set.
This is where it will get really complicated!
Cheers,
Steve
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 00:20:20 +
From: Fons Adriaensen f...@linuxaudio.org
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Construction of purpose
I would definitely second Jörn. We had a 16 speaker array (4-8-4) in a room
which was hexagonal (with a pitched roof) that comes out as near a
hemisphere as far as audio is concerned. It had an awful focusing effect at
the centre until a brilliant guy in our estates department came up with a
--On 13 March 2014 07:30 + Dave Malham dave.mal...@york.ac.uk
wrote:
It had an awful focusing effect at
the centre until a brilliant guy in our estates department came up
with a relatively low cost solution which was to get a large (~3-4
metre diameter) end dish from a beer brewing
On 03/10/2014 11:50 PM, Steve Boardman wrote:
Hi J?rn (not sure what the character '?' is as it always displays
that way)
an o with double dot.
the way i approach it is: * keep the early reflection paths clean
for every speaker, like you would for stereo. no reflections 10
ms is a good
-Original Message-
From: Sursound [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of
Steven Boardman
Sent: 08 March 2014 01:13
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: [Sursound] Construction of purpose built ambisonic studio.
Hi all.
I am about to embark on the construction
I've been to Richard's place and can confirm that the system sounds great.
Heard some of my recordings in gloriously full surround and impressed myself no
end!
Regards,
John
On 11 Mar 2014, at 16:13, Richard Furse rich...@muse440.com wrote:
Hi there - sounds like a good venture!
, as to date I have only used the platonic solids, or only
horizontal decodes.
Cheers
Steve
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 20:26:17 -0800
From: Aaron Heller hel...@ai.sri.com
To: Surround Sound discussion group sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Construction of purpose built
Hi J?rn (not sure what the character '?' is as it always displays that way)
Wow, thanks for al the info!
still holds for ambisonics. try to get as many different room modes as
possible.
This is good news, and obviously what I presumed but it is the idea of the same
response from each
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 09:50:43PM +, Steve Boardman wrote:
Stanford's CCRMA room does look (and undoubtably sound) good, but
the space below is maybe a bit over board for what I want to achieve,
in the space I have. The actual area of the build space is probably
around 180 square foot
On 03/08/2014 02:13 AM, Steven Boardman wrote:
I have constructed many studios in the past but never one where all the
speaker positions have equal importance. Normally with stereo it is
beneficial for the sides of the space not to be divisible into each other.
still holds for ambisonics. try
This could be an interesting thread. I hope it keeps growing.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Steve,
I'm not sure I follow everything you're saying about angle errors, but
there are a few installations that work well here in the SF Bay area that I
have personal experience with. The Listening Room at Stanford's CCRMA
is a 3rd-order periphonic facility, described here
Hi all.
I am about to embark on the construction of a purpose built ambisonic
studio, which will also double as a 5.1 suite.
I have constructed many studios in the past but never one where all the
speaker positions have equal importance. Normally with stereo it is
beneficial for the sides of the
13 matches
Mail list logo
