In a case such as the FA101 I'd be very tempted to make an internal conversion to a 10-channel (analog) interface. I'm not at all sure what the internal structure is like for the FA101. Most USBUARTs come in multiples of 2 channels, which once again leads one towards things like an 8-channel interface.
I have built, or perhaps I should say played around with, several different method for creating a 2nd order microphone system. Some of them deliver B-format (using that in the extended sense) with minimal post processing. So, yes, I'm planning on having B-format available directly. I'd rather record B-format since B-format is what I intend to use. One can make the argument for recording A-format because it's possible that some new information's or philosophy may become available such that a better conversion can be made at a later time. However, for me it's mostly worked to my disadvantage. I just made an A-format recording using the DPA-4 rig, and son of a gun if I didn't screw it up again. Which capsule was the first one? Is this set of files the ones before the EQ or after the EQ? Of course those same sorts of problems can occur if it's B-format that is being recorded. So, yah, I'd rather record B-format. What is your preference? Eric ----- Original Message ---- From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: Surround Sound discussion group <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, March 5, 2011 12:13:55 PM Subject: Re: [Sursound] Ambisonics symposium 2011: was help with links ... Hi Eric, Well, if we are talking about laptop based systems, a lot of interfaces (like my personal Edirol FA101) have eight analogue inputs plus two more on an spdif input. Not, therefore, beyond the bounds of possibility to add an external box to do analogue to SPDIF conversion to get to ten channels....might need to record an all channel click on each recording to ensure any interchannel delay differences can be cancelled out. Do I gather from the fact that you are asking about numbers of channels that you are doing A-B conversion in hardware not software?? Dave On Mar 5 2011, Eric Benjamin wrote: >> would be happy with eight channels. (can i synch two zoom H2s? > I was, in fact, fishing for your opinions on the number of channels. >Personally, although I retain some sort of purist perspective that a complete >9-channel 2nd-order system would be best, when bringing in the difficulty of >taking along that 9th channel on a recording expedition, 2nd-order horizontal >or >a mixed order representation becomes much more attractive! > > What I am building presently is designed to fit with my own recording needs >which include portability and being relatively inexpensive. For me, an >8-channel >audio interface attached to my laptop is reasonably attractive, although >something like the Tascam DR-680 (at 800 US $) is more attractive. The DR-680 >is >certainly more expensive than two Zoom H2s, although not a LOT more expensive. >Real recorders always seem to be better than a computer + interface when it >comes down to practicality. > > Beyond that, connectorization, powering, sensitivity to vibration and wind > are >all issues that have to be dealt with. I'd like to be able to put all the gear >in one bag and go recording. Microphone, cable, stand, recorder, and that's >it. >For me, many recording opportunities vanish because of what I'll call >opportunity cost. I need to be able to grab it and go. > > Comments? I'm quite interested in what any of you have to say. > > Eric > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: umashankarmantravadi <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, March 5, 2011 12:48:07 AM > Subject: Re: [Sursound] Ambisonics symposium 2011: was help with links ... > > > i would be happy with eight channels. (can i synch two zoom H2s?) i think >ambisonics will only take off if there are cheap simple systems that many >people >can use. at home now i am setting up an eight speaker system, about 50 watts >per >channel, with a total cost including an eight channel d/a of less than 400 >USD. >i only have to wire up the eighth loudspeaker (why does inertia kick in right >at >end? i can understand at the start. fear of failure?) > > umashankar > > > > i have published my poems. read (or buy) at http://stores.lulu.com/umashankar > > > >> Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 22:54:23 -0800 From: [email protected] To: >>[email protected] Subject: Re: [Sursound] Ambisonics symposium 2011: was >>help with links ... >> >> > how many recording channels will it need? >> How many would you like for it to be? >> >> Recording 9 channels for 2nd order is a little unattractive in a world in >which >> >> audio interfaces typically come in groups of 8. But if one is willing to >>consider recording only horizontal (5 channels) or mixed order with 2nd-order >>horizontal and 1st order vertical (6-channels), it becomes a lot more >>tractable. >> >> Both of those handily fit within the capabilities of the Tascam DR-680, for >>instance. >> >> There are other considerations. Although we might like to record > periphonically >> for a future-proof recording, therre are some real difficulties associated >with >> >> trying to reproduce 2nd order material with-height using a loudspeaker array >>that fits in a normal domestic room. >> >> Eric >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- From: umashankarmantravadi >> <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 9:14:10 PM Subject: Re: >>[Sursound] Ambisonics symposium 2011: was help with links ... >> >> >> dear eric >> >> first question. how many recording channels will it need? >> >> umashankar >> >> >> i have published my poems. read (or buy) at http://stores.lulu.com/umashankar >> >> >> >> > Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 20:49:23 -0800 >> > From: [email protected] >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: [Sursound] Ambisonics symposium 2011: was help with links ... >> > > > > Peter Lennox <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > anyone taking something interesting to the Ambisonics symposium > > 2011 >> > > in >>Kentucky? >> > > > I'm planning on bring a prototype of a practical, affordable > >>second-order soundfield microphone. Of course it's not done yet, and > >>perhaps >>I'm talking through my hat. Why would I claim something that I > haven't >>finished? To put the pressure on so that I do finish! >> > > Eric >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Sursound mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >><https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110305/5b14d8fd/attachment.html> >> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sursound mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Sursound mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML >attachment was scrubbed... URL: ><https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110305/d726d32d/attachment.html> > > > _______________________________________________ > Sursound mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > > _______________________________________________ > Sursound mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
