On 18/07/2011 19:34, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 07/18/2011 06:18 PM, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
So we’re taking advantage of
what we learned there to create this feeling that things are being
projected into space in the D axis, the depth axis.
<sound of coffee being expelled through the nose>
the what?
so this is 4d spacetime, right? x, y, z, and d :) now this funny drone noise, is that minkowski
spinning in his grave?
Careful, here I differ!
In a parametric approach, d makes a lot of sense. It is not clear from the interview < how > the
distance cues are reproduced, agreed.
And I (re)differ. In a parametric approach it makes no sense (and may even be harmful) to define a
parameter twice, as this implies. If we assume the _actually_ mean distance when they talk of depth,
then that is already given by the audio object's position w.r.t. the listener.Anything else is just
mumbo-jumbo..or, rather, it is mistaking the affect of having audio objects (including early
reflections and so on) presented at many different distances, rather than at similar apparent
distances, for something that is real and physical.
Music representation according to this approach is clearly five-dimensional (x,y,z, d and t!), so
they call this "multidimensial audio"/MDA... O:-) :-)
You've forgotten timbre, loudness, rhythm and so on..hang on, isn't getting to sound a bit like
string theory (and if it is, ain't that going to annoy the wind and percussion sections.......).
Sorry, sorry, couldn't resist.
However, X-talk cancelling techniques would require close speakers.
i'm not sure about this. from what i've heard, rwth aachen are running a CAVE with head tracking
and binaural feeds delivered by a cube of speakers (as that is the only layout that wouldn't
interfere too much with their screen configuration). no idea how exactly they do it, but there
should be some papers out there. iirc they can even accomodate more than one listener. haven't
heard it, though.
See
http://darwin.bth.rwth-aachen.de/opus3/volltexte/2009/2713/pdf/Assenmacher_Ingo.pdfts";.
of course you could also say "we are harnessing ultrasound-triggered ectoplasm for real 4-d sound
projectiong using our proprietary one-more-dimension-than-your-mum technology". yawn.
Disagree, and strongly! They are demonstrating their technology, this is not
about vaporware.
Don't think he's saying it's vapourware - just that it sounds like snake-oil sales talk...but a
truly modern version of this should include the "q" word in it at least once (well, strictly
speaking, it would be superimposed an infinite number of times, but would collapse to a single state
on being read)
My opinion: It is the right time to introduce some improved surround system into the market, at
least in the cinema area there seems to be real demand.
Scientifically, we should have gathered enough knowledge to be able to do so,
by now.
Agreed (and so, apparently, do the BBC and many others)
Surround is not just about Ambisonics and maybe WFS, yet again.
True - but they are ones that work and are well established.
Dave
--
These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer
/*********************************************************************/
/* Dave Malham http://music.york.ac.uk/staff/research/dave-malham/ */
/* Music Research Centre */
/* Department of Music "http://music.york.ac.uk/"; */
/* The University of York Phone 01904 432448 */
/* Heslington Fax 01904 432450 */
/* York YO10 5DD */
/* UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' */
/* "http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/"; */
/*********************************************************************/
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
