On 17/04/2011 02:28, Junfeng Li wrote:
Dear list,
I am now wondering how to subjectively evaluate distance perception in
virtual environments which might be synthesized using WFS or HOA (high-order
ambisonics). In my experiments, the sounds were synthesized at different
distances and presented
On 30/05/2011 16:18, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 07:49:19AM -0700, Ralph Glasgal wrote:
RACE operates over the full bandwidth although it does
nothing useful XTC-wise in the very low bass or the very
high treble. David's operates only between 200 and 1000 Hz.
I wonder what
On 30/05/2011 17:45, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 05:08:41PM +0100, dw wrote:
On 30/05/2011 16:18, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 07:49:19AM -0700, Ralph Glasgal wrote:
RACE operates over the full bandwidth although it does
nothing useful XTC-wise
On 30/05/2011 15:49, Ralph Glasgal wrote:
David's new crosstalk cancelling impulse response filter is a valuable addition
to the large library of crosstalk cancelling gizmos now available. I just used
it with Waves IR-L (under AudioMulch) for the front speakers and RACE (via
TacT) for the
On 30/05/2011 22:28, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 07:32:52PM +0100, dw wrote:
At low frequencies this
corresponds to the signals being (nearly) 180 out of phase at the
speakers until I give up on flogging the speakers to death and swap
to driving them in phase.
I understand
On 01/06/2011 17:42, Ralph Glasgal wrote:
In most of the papers on crosstalk cancellation the point is made that at lower
freauencies the power required to cancel the bass becomes prohibitive. I will
make a feeble attempt to explain why this is a fallacy that derives from a
common propensity
On 01/06/2011 20:38, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:42:42AM -0700, Ralph Glasgal wrote:
But, the ear is not sensitive to crosstalk below say 100Hz so
Where do you get this from ? Are you seriously saying that a low
frequency signal delivered to one ear sounds natural ?
On 03/06/2011 01:04, Marc Lavallée wrote:
Le Thu, 2 Jun 2011 14:27:24 -0700 (PDT),
Ralph Glasgalrglas...@yahoo.com a écrit :
Obviously there is no reason not to use subwoofers with RACE, Wareing,
or Choueiri.
But those filters were designed to work with full range speakers, so
unless the
On 10/06/2011 13:33, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:43:55AM +0100, Paul Hodges wrote:
--On 10 June 2011 10:26 +0200 Bo-Erik Sandholm
bo-erik.sandh...@ericsson.com wrote:
Case B : Use a steady state 50 Hz signal and slowly pan it to new
locations.
Of course, as this
On 13/06/2011 03:44, Marc Lavallée wrote:
I made an A/B/C switch to listen between direct stereo, BACCH and the
new DW filters; both filters are cancelling well, but BACCH is less
coloured.
Not EYCv2L-44.wav, I assume. It must be a high $,$$$ version you have!
I am curious how you manage
On 09/07/2011 10:03, ch...@chriswoolf.co.uk wrote:
60 degrees seems excessive head movement for someone seated
listening to
speakers..
Why ? It's a natural thing to do if there is any significant sound
from that direction. Why should being listening to speakers make
any difference ? I like to
On 09/07/2011 21:38, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 09:19:07PM +0100, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 02:04:21PM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote:
The perceived directional bandwidth of stereo recordings is better
than what conventional
On 09/07/2011 22:28, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 07/09/2011 11:13 PM, dw wrote:
Care to send a clip of an impossible-to-sound-as-good-as-with-stereo
recording for me to play with.
well, this kind of stand-off isn't likely to lead anywhere. sounds
good is very hard to define or even test
On 10/07/2011 09:00, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 07/10/2011 12:32 AM, dw wrote:
I was thinking more of recording in mono, computing the vectors in
various bands from the output of some large microphone array and then
encoding (the mono sound) into the required number of spherical
harmonics
On 10/07/2011 11:02, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:10:49AM +0100, dw wrote:
Any microphone capable of separating two sound sources MUST be large in
terms of wavelengths (similar to the diffraction limit for telescopes)
The soundfield microphone cannot separate two or more
On 10/07/2011 19:36, Marc Lavallée wrote:
dwsurso...@dwareing.plus.com a écrit :
On 10/07/2011 18:10, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
If you can't reproduce full horizontal 360º surround via two front
speakers, then the binaural via two loudspeakers approach doesn't
work, and there is no solution
This one is vaguely in-head rather than down, and also well-out-of head.
I am doing these with the my public domain 'stereo' filter, which is not
ideal for this. I have deleted my stuff as I am turning my back on audio
for another decade after I tidy up some loose ends.
Hi all,
Just popped in to do some spamming..
I hope there are still some here with a passing interest in binaural.
I have made a new type of dummy head, and am looking for some feedback
on whether it works for anyone other than myself.
The samples are here:
On 18/05/2013 02:17, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
On current headphones, neither stereo nor 5.1 sound really convincing.
Therefore, the headphone companies and - some day - maybe even Apple
etc. should look for ways to defeat the in-head and listening-fatigue
effects on current devices. It is
O
If we find some convincing ways to reproduce surround via headphones,
a market could easily be developped. Other people might want to listen
to (future) surround recordings via 6, many or zillions (WFS)
loudspeakers at home. This never will be a mass market, but if
(configuration
On 23/05/2013 17:17, Simon Edmonds wrote:
Ooops - I'll try that again
Raspberry Pi has HDMI
HDMI supports 8 channels of HD digital audio
I wasted a lot of time trying. I think the RPi only supports two
channels on HDMI, or did six months ago.
Jackd also seemed to be broken, although some
-binaural.mp3
-DW http://www.freesound.org/people/dwareing/sounds/189818/
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
On 19/09/2013 20:50, David Worrall wrote:
(*) Is there a way of searching across
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/?
You don't even need to subscribe to the list to search it..
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.audio.sursound
Oh well, forget me trying Ambisionics-binaural periphony then.. Not
worth the effort.
I'll leave you with some stereo I inadvertently recorded from the telly,
before I delete it.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/o07pwtokung2h8i/Stones%20at%20Glastonbury%20tv%20stereo%20to%20binaral%20%20.mp3
http://www.freesound.org/people/dwareing/sounds/204958/
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
This is in my dropbox for a short time, for those without a freesound
account.
The built-in player there is low bitrate.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gs67gis7br3f5fm/blustery%20showers.mp3
Really good with the right cans!
___
Sursound mailing list
On 11/11/2013 12:48, Eero Aro wrote:
Dave Malham:
Oh - I see, the naming of the files implies LF and simultaneously
that it
is 330 degrees...which is it, Eero?
The Harpex display shows it (LF 330) at RF 30 deg.. Can't any of you
guys actually play it!
There of plenty of reasons why
Original Message
From: - Mon Nov 11 18:55:53 2013
X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
X-Mozilla-Status2: 0080
X-Mozilla-Keys:
Message-ID: 52812836.1070...@dwareing.plus.com
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 18:55:50 +
From: dw d...@dwareing.plus.com
User-Agent
On 11/11/2013 15:39, Andy Furniss wrote:
dw wrote:
There of plenty of reasons why Ambisonics and binaural should not
work well, but it can sound ok to me on My £11 cans..
Interesting can you expand a bit?
Here are some links:
http://www.gbcasa.org/cms/audio/Griesinger-Binaural-Hearing
Perhaps witchcraft needs some strange settings.
For headhones - https://www.dropbox.com/s/iga71wluxfcb4i6/Untitled2.mp3
On 22/11/2013 14:21, dw wrote:
On 21/11/2013 19:08, Aaron Heller wrote:
I took the liberty of merging them into 4-channel files and putting
them on
my server, which might
. Of course it's difficult to be certain.
From: dw d...@dwareing.plus.com
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Sent: Friday, November 22, 2013 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Hector bird recording - SoundCloud
On 21/11/2013 19:08, Aaron Heller wrote:
I took the liberty
On 02/12/2013 20:33, Julian Rabius wrote:
Of course, personal HRIRs are to be prefered, but up to now I use these:
https://dev.qu.tu-berlin.de/projects/measurements/wiki/Impulse_Response_Measurements
I came across these KU100 data:
http://www.audiogroup.web.fh-koeln.de/ku100hrir.html
although
On 02/12/2013 21:08, Andy Furniss wrote:
Interesting and cheap - not so sure about the magnetometer near speakers.
Less of a problem than eating the baked beans that were stowed next to
the fluxgate compass sensor, coming down the North Channel one night,
one would think.
On 12/12/2013 12:40, Marc Lavallée wrote:
Hi Étienne.
etienne deleflie edelef...@gmail.com a écrit :
... and then ambisonics is suddenly available to
masses of people, for very cheap, and with a consistent and quality
spatial experience (assuming the HRTF decoding can be done right).
Etienne
On 12/12/2013 12:44, umashankar manthravadi wrote:
two years ago, I acquired a motor cycle helmet with the intention of mounting
eight headphones to listen to ambisonics without hrtf. i was going to use it
with a 20 dollar dolby 7.1 usb device.
It was not one of your better plans.. :-)
From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of dw
[d...@dwareing.plus.com]
Sent: 12 December 2013 23:02
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Upcoming Android apps ambisonic related
On 12/12/2013 12:44, umashankar manthravadi wrote:
two years ago, I acquired
On 21/12/2013 03:40, David Worrall wrote:
I remember reading that, with exposure, human's audio-processing hardware can
adapt to/learn how to use a non-optimal HRTF, given a bit of time.
Does anyone have a reference for this?
On 21/12/2013 10:58, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 12/12/2013 12:40, Marc Lavallée wrote:
Hi Étienne.
etienne deleflie edelef...@gmail.com a écrit :
... and then ambisonics is suddenly available to
masses of people, for very cheap, and with a consistent and quality
spatial
On 21/12/2013 10:58, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Just for clarification. (Nobody corrected this.)
The Ambisonic scientologists don't want to play?
In 1901, Allen Upward http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Upward
coined /Scientology/ as a disparaging term, to indicate a blind,
unthinking
On 21/12/2013 13:28, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 21/12/2013 10:58, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 12/12/2013 12:40, Marc Lavallée wrote:
Hi Étienne.
etienne deleflie edelef...@gmail.com a écrit :
... and then ambisonics is suddenly available to
masses of people
On 21/12/2013 16:24, Marc Lavallée wrote:
My comprehension of Ambisonics is that the listener's head (in the
sweetest spot) is exposed to one coherent approximation of a
reproduced (or synthesized) sound field, not to a set of directional
waves coming from the speakers (one directional wave
On 22/12/2013 22:24, Marc Lavallée wrote:
Sun, 22 Dec 2013 15:17:27 -0500,
Len Moskowitz lenmoskow...@optonline.net a écrit :
The capture array of microphones pictured in their Rondo video seems
rudimentary. They're soliciting developers.
More links:
http://www.google.com/patents/US20040076301
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
On 28/12/2013 23:25, Aaron Heller wrote:
Dick Duda and Ralph Algazi gave a talk and demo at a San Francisco AES
meeting at Dolby Labs a few years ago. At that time, they were recording
with a head-sized sphere with either 8 or 16 microphones around the
equator. They imagined that 8 would be
I had a look, but I have a few problems..
I don't seem able to play 1a.
The test is not blind as the curious, like me, can see the file names in
the source.
The Longcat eg.1b is the clear winner.
I cannot force myself to listen to that much filtered noise - it seems
pointless and unpleasant!
I had a similar problem with the BBC's efforts:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3/2011/12/the-festival-of-nine-lessons-and-carols-in-surround-sound.shtml
In that case I could not dowload them and switch quickly between
versions. All that I could usefully say is that they all sounded bad,
and
On 08/01/2014 17:29, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 05:19:53PM +, dw wrote:
I have a problem with band-filtered noise. I don't think it tell you
anything very useful, as the results are only applicable to
band-filtered noise, and often anechoic HRTFS are used too
http://xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
On 09/01/2014 17:57, Andrew Castiglione wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/01/09/beyond-mp3-new-push-for-high-resoluti
on-music/?intcmp=features
A 3.5 minute song can be 120MB or more, rather than 3 to 4 in a typical MP3.
24/48 and beyond.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/iga71wluxfcb4i6/Untitled2.mp3
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Thanks for listening!
Yes, it is good recording, and uses Q-sound. I tried not to spoil it..
The soundfile link is after it has been convolved with binaural IRs from
my dummy head and room.
The IRs have gone through my speakers, room, dummy head, inverse
filtering and final eq. Frequencies
.
From: dw d...@dwareing.plus.com
To: Surround Sound discussion group sursound@music.vt.edu
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 6:23 AM
Subject: [Sursound] 'Quasi-flat' binaural
https://www.dropbox.com/s/iga71wluxfcb4i6/Untitled2.mp3
then scale the IRs by resampling. This would have
the effect of a smaller or larger head/ears, which I could then alter on
the dummy head.
Audacity for example has a speed change facility (top left, green arrow,
and slider)
Many thanks to anyone playing!
On 10/01/2014 14:23, dw wrote:
https
. This also has the unintended benefit of damping
the bass resonance. There are probably, ahem, better cans, but at least
one can replicate part of my listening method, if not my ears.
Eric Benjamin
From: dw d...@dwareing.plus.com
To: Surround Sound
On 10/01/2014 20:48, Eric Benjamin wrote:
David,
Intriguing, but I don't know exactly what it is that I'm supposed to be
hearing! A little descriptive text would be helpful.
Eric Benjamin
I will add another cryptic clue, for the curious.:-)
ITU-T Recommendation P-58 - HATS simulator for
https://www.dropbox.com/s/valq6l3hhcsj1kq/Quasi-flat-binaural-IRs.zip
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
On 20/01/2014 02:30, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
For a real-world application (next stage?), you might have to think
how to connect a headtracker or headtracker-module to your mobile
phone and other devices. (Interface question)
It worked BTW. If someone can come up with a suitable ascii knob or midi
interface.
On 20/01/2014 17:04, dw wrote:
On 20/01/2014 02:30, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
For a real-world application (next stage?), you might have to think
how to connect a headtracker or headtracker-module to your
At the risk of upsetting just about everyone:-) here is my personal opinion:
The science of binaural is a wonderful example of bending observations
to fit the theory.
I'm not entirely convinced there are any significant _head-related_
elevation cues.
There are front/back cues IMO, but they are
Is it possible to run this on a PC via an Android emulator. If so, how
does one go about doing so?
On 11/10/2014 00:29, Hector Centeno wrote:
Hello all,
After some delay, version 2 of AmbiExplorer is finally out and available at
the Google Play store:
Great effort, with much potential! The streaming part worked for me,
except that my computer is too slow to do the room response convolution
'Binaural 2', The combination of anechoic IRs, and an incongruous
collection of reverberant sound effects and dry, mono speech did not
appeal to me..
, at 11:28, dw d...@dwareing.plus.com wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p028snwx
Almost all in/near-head, to my ears.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit
account
On 11/11/2014 21:39, Bearcat M. Şándor wrote:
I'm impressed. You put these together very well. Only the first one loaded
completely but i was able to hear samples of all 4 streams. I haven't had
much experience with binaural recordings. To me it sounded everything was
in a band that was tight
On 13/11/2014 03:52, Adam Somers wrote:
Still, I've yet to find a solution for b-to-binaural which is as convincing
as some of the BRIR-based object-sound spatialization packages (e.g. DTS
HeadphoneX and Visisonics Realspace). I think what's primarily lacking is
externalization, which perhaps
On 19/11/2014 20:42, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
The VRSFX system can do 2-dimensional head-tracking. At best!
I have a feeling head-tracked nodding is not going to help the
combination of Ambisonics and binaural.
___
Sursound mailing list
On 19/11/2014 22:01, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 19/11/2014 20:42, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
The VRSFX system can do 2-dimensional head-tracking. At best!
I have a feeling head-tracked nodding is not going to help the
combination of Ambisonics and binaural.
Completely
I am thinking of FOA above.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit
account or options, view archives and so on.
There are numerous examples where the predictions of HRTF localisation
are falsified by observations. What is one to think of the science?
On 19/11/2014 22:12, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 19/11/2014 20:42, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Binaural recordings have weaknesses
would expect the
auditory image to rotate with the head/ears/torso. Neither happens in
all cases.. And then there is the 'externalization' problem.
On 20 Nov 2014, at 9:46 AM, dw d...@dwareing.plus.com wrote:
There are numerous examples where the predictions of HRTF localisation
On 19/11/2014 23:08, Paul Doornbusch wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 10:01 AM, dw d...@dwareing.plus.com wrote:
On 19/11/2014 22:49, Paul Doornbusch wrote:
Can you give us some links to this please?
Thanks,
Paul
I'll give you a couple. If you record a sound in front of a dummy head, you
would
On 20/11/2014 17:59, Adam Somers wrote:
We just released our first piece of VR content with ambisonic audio to the
public. It's a live recording on stage at a recent Paul McCartney
concert. The audio was captured from the sound board and mixed in
b-format. Available for Google Cardboard now,
On 19/11/2014 22:12, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Your posting seems to be meaningless if not arrogant, BTW.
Let me put it in a more positive way then.. Your thinking is
representative of the state of the art in binaural science.:-)
Previous work
The state-of-the-art finds it very difficult to render sounds below the
listener. To do it with a 'flat' frequency response, and referenced to
ground/gravity ie.. unaffected by normal, small head movements is a
bonus. It is just a pity it might take a while to get used to..
I can't tell after
of binaural recordings
that I have heard.
On 22/11/2014 02:30, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
The state-of-the-art finds it very difficult to render sounds below
the listener. To do it with a 'flat' frequency response, and
referenced to ground/gravity ie.. unaffected by normal, small head
they are wrong due
to the lack of observational support for the implied predictions of said
theories.
On 22/11/2014 02:34, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
dw wrote:
On 19/11/2014 22:12, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Your posting seems to be meaningless if not arrogant, BTW.
Let me put it in a more
On 22/11/2014 02:43, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
I don't believe that the BBC study is really flawless, BTW. (Günther
Theile thought the same.)
Günther Theile is not one of my drinking buddies, I wish he was. BTW
the Stax demo is not that great..
Stefan. bach, You have not actually downloaded it, nobody has!
Unless you are making the assumption that very low bitrate MP3 is the
same as 24bit flac, there is nothing to discuss.
On 22/11/2014 02:30, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
http://www.freesound.org/people/dwareing/sounds/255159/
This
probably it.
Regards,
John
On 24 Nov 2014, at 20:25, dw d...@dwareing.plus.com wrote:
I have found only two models of headphones that seem to compromise the
binaural effect, and those are the Sony MDR-V6 and V7.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound
I have many molds and casts of my ears and head in different materials.
I can, for instance put my face ( in plaster ) on the back of my head.
Once you start with something that works for you, your own natural
hearing, for example, it is remarkably difficult to break, or
understand. How would
You need to be a little careful. A trusted assistant is amost essential.
I did it on my own as I can't get my wife to do such things..
Alginate is probably the safest material. I used a version of Nathan
Galliardo's method for the ears. Alginate, plaster, silicone, whatever:
I found a picture of my ear molding:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mxzamir7j0plsez/ears.JPG?dl=0
The alginate stage is not shown but the container was clamped over the
ear with the modded ear muffs with a CD with a hole in it behind the
ear,sealed with shaving gel. I sealed the ear canal with wax
/Acoustics_Today/Pitch,%20Timbre,%20Source%20Separation_talk_web_sound_3.pptx
On 26/11/2014 03:36, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
On 2014-11-19, dw wrote:
There are numerous examples where the predictions of HRTF
localisation are falsified by observations. What is one to think of
the science?
So now you'd
81 matches
Mail list logo
