On 13/05/2011, at 3:35 AM, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: > On 05/03/2011 09:29 AM, Aaron Heller wrote: >> 2011/5/2 Jörn Nettingsmeier<[email protected]>: >> >>> those "slightly more speakers than necessary" cases are a bit tricky... >>> first order over a 24 hemisphere is horrible, >> >> At the 2008 demo I wrote about, other that the anomaly at the exact >> center, I thought it sounded pretty good. So did most of the 60 or so >> people who came though during the evening. Definitely not horrible. > > ah well, bad choice of words. "below expectations" would have been better. > the IEM cube (24 speaker hemisphere)
I looked at the photo here: http://iem.at/services/studios/cube And I fail to see a hemisphere. In any event, how does a cube become hemispheric? Or is this just a flowery use of language? David > does not work very well for first-order, but then their standard decoders are > "not ambisonic" by the usual standards in that they don't employ shelf > filtering. in 3rd order, it sings beautifully. when you use just a subset, > say six in the horizontal, localisation is definitely improved. > >> There was a quite convincing sense of the space in which the >> recordings were made. In the Stravinsky recording, you hear the >> reverberation of the brass instruments moving around the hall, as it >> actually does. In the recording of the piano recital, you can hear a >> slight slap echo from the front of the balcony above and behind the >> microphone. The contrast from indoors to outdoors is especially >> striking. As I said earlier, the envelopment and accuracy of timbre >> are the keys for me -- they draw you into the performance. > > agreed. i never found anything amiss with envelopment when using more > speakers than optimal for any given order, but localisation suffers. > >>> the most striking experience of horizontal first-order degradation over >>> eight speakers was in the sala bianca in parma, using virtual ambisonic >>> speakers on their wfs system. fons demo'ed ambi rendering, and we switched >>> between six and eight sources. >> >> Could you describe what you heard? I'm genuinely curious. > > from memory (it's been a while), the sound sources seemed to widen > considerably with eight speakers. > also, the timbre seemed a bit duller. i found the same on other occasions: > first-order over eight seems less bright than over four or six. you can fix > this with a bit of treble shelf boost to taste, and that will usually get rid > of any clear preference your listening subjects might have, but it does > indicate that there is more combing going on at HF. > > > -- > Jörn Nettingsmeier > Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487 > > Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio) > Tonmeister VDT > > http://stackingdwarves.net > > _______________________________________________ > Sursound mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound _____________________________________________ Dr David Worrall Adjunct Research Fellow, Australian National University [email protected] Board Member, International Community for Auditory Display Regional Editor, Organised Sound (CUP) Projects Officer, Music Council of Australia worrall.avatar.com.au sonification.com.au mca.org.au musicforum.org.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110513/f904673b/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
