i firmly believe there are existing and evolving areas for use of immersive audio.

movies, anyone? i'd prefer to have something other than 5, 6, 7 .1 formats with various implementations (3 across front, 5 across front, 1 center, 2 sides, whatever) that simply gives a better immersive experience to the audience.

games, anyone? as mentioned later in this thread, head-tracking systems combined with immersive audio would be a rather serious elephant in the room for the Very Large Money in gaming.

Seva D. L. Ball
Audio Engineering / Systems
Soundcurrent Mastering
AES, NARAS, ARSC, IASA, F&AM


At 11:12 -0400 4/3/12, newme...@aol.com wrote:
Peter:

 So, if that's right, stereo is predicated on quite a specialized  musical
presentation.

Correct!  This is the "presentation" that  comes along with "perspective"
in Renaissance painting and the "linearity" of  printed books, etc.

It is a product, if you will, of the Gutenberg Galaxy -- which, in  turn,
started to unravel in the 19th century, yielding "electric" music and  ending
the "classical" period in composition.

This is, perhaps, why the Bell Labs experiments that yielded the 3-channel stereo (which they determined was the "minimum" needed to actually produce
a  "solid" musical image, especially for an audience) was discussed in  the
1934 "Symposium on Auditory Perspective."

_http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/bell.labs/auditoryperspective.pdf_
(http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/bell.labs/auditoryperspective.pdf)

So, on this account, you might expect that some music that "preceded" the imposition of this EYE-based conformity would exhibit more respect for the "surround," just as you would expect that some music that "followed" the relaxing of this *environmental* constraint might also begin to explicitly investigate the *spherical* nature of sound.

That is, of course, exactly what seems to have happened!

None of which, however, changes the fact that in the electric era -- the first and only media environment which created MASS audiences -- music
continued  to be largely an expression of the "unconscious" orientation for
"perspective" (i.e. linear, eye-based, frontal performances), which then became a
very  "conscious" part of the commercialization of "performances" -- in our
own  living-rooms.

It would have to wait for the further shift from *electric* to *digital* media environment for all of this -- both the linearity of Gutenberg and the "chaos" of "modernity" -- to begin to appear as arbitrary and merely
historical  "accidents."

Now, we are ready for Ambisonics (but not as a mass-market phenomenon) . . . as we all become MEDIEVAL (or, if you prefer, post-modern) once again!!

Mark Stahlman
Brooklyn NY


In a message dated 4/3/2012 10:44:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
p.len...@derby.ac.uk writes:

I've  always assumed that frontal, proscenium arch -type presentations came
out of  the logistics of clocking large numbers of musicians together -
generally  using a visual cue in the form of a conductor (also, individual
musicians  might feel a bit lonely if they can't hang out with their mates) -
and this in  turn helped reify the distinction between the music makers and
the music  listeners.
In other musical forms (music to have your dinner by, Telemann,  lounge
music, ambient, scallywags employed to amuse the medieval court , up  there in
the minstrels gallery, modern club music, wedding party celebration  music,
religious music [various cultures] etc etc) 'front' would have less, if any, relevance.
So, if that's right, stereo is predicated on quite a  specialised musical
presentation.

So, then, saying 'stereo is all you  need' is a bit like saying 'you don't
need 4 wheel drive' - true, but in  circumscribed circumstances.

Dr Peter Lennox
School of Technology University of Derby, UK
tel: 01332 593155
e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk

-----Original Message-----
From:  sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu]
On Behalf  Of Dave Malham
Sent: 03 April 2012 09:49
To: Surround Sound discussion  group
Subject: Re: [Sursound] OT: Spatial music

Hi  Robert,
Umm - I was making exactly the opposite point -  invented in the
16th century makes it, as far as music is concerned, a very  new
concept. On the other hand,when talking about  "acoustic  _concert_
music", it's almost tautologous that they are frontally  presented,
because the whole concept of a musical concert was invented at  the
same time, probably as a way of making money (I haven't  researched
that, it's just a guess) - it's much more difficult to make  money from
an audience who can just walk away without embarrassing  themselves -
and if you don't believe that (the fear of) embarrassment is  not a
strong driver, just watch an inexperienced western audience at the  end
of a Gamelan concert trying to get up the courage to actually  leave
the concert _during_ the ending piece :-) . Actually, talking  about
Gamelan, that's a case in point - in the West (and  probably
increasingly in it's home countries) Gamelan is usually  presented
frontally (even we usually do that) but this is _not_  correct
traditionally.

Dave

On 2 April 2012  16:34, Robert Greene <gre...@math.ucla.edu> wrote:

 It  may be old but it is still all but universal
 in acoustic concert  music.
 I think it is disingenuous to say that it is not.
 How  many symphony concerts have you been to
 recently where the orchestra  surrounded the audience.
 The other way around, sure.
 But I  think this is just not true, that music
 with the musicians around the  audience is common.
 Not in the statistical sense of percentage  of
 concerts where it happens.
 Robert

 On Mon, 2  Apr 2012, Dave Malham wrote:

 Right on - as I've said  before, frontal  music is largely a development
of
 16th  century Western civilisation and is not universal, even  now.

 By the way, be careful about the Gabrielli's in  St. Marks - there is at
 least some evidence that separate choirs  singing antiphonally were _not
 _used at St Mark's (see Bryant, D.  "The Cori Spezzati of St. Mark's:
Myth
 and Reality" in Early Music  History, Cambridge 1981, p169).

  Dave


 On 01/04/2012 10:20, Paul  Hodges wrote:

 --On 31 March 2012 18:34 -0700  Robert Greene <gre...@math.ucla.edu>
  wrote:

 Of course music exists that is  not in front. But the vast bulk of
 concert music is  not like that.


 Sure; but what  proportion of music are we happy to be unable to
reproduce
  properly?  My organ music (admittedly as much as 20% of my listening)
was  a
 trivial example - and it's only in combination with other  things that
it
 becomes spatially interesting, generally.  You mentioned Gabrieli and
 Berlioz in a slightly  dismissive manner; I would add to them people
like
 Stockhausen  and Earle Brown, a folk group moving among their audience,
a
  hall full of schoolchildren bouncing their sounds off each other  from
 different parts of the hall.  Not all within the  restricted form of
"concert
 music", but music in the real  world where we turn our heads and enjoy
our
 whole  environment.

  Paul


 --
 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 322448                */
 /* Heslington      Fax   01904 322450        */
  /* York YO10 5DD                   */
 /* UK    'Ambisonics -  Component Imaging for Audio'   */
 /*         "http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/"; */
  /*********************************************************************/

  -------------- next part --------------
 An HTML attachment was  scrubbed...
 URL:

<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120402/49f083b7/attachment.html>
 >>  _______________________________________________
 Sursound mailing  list
 Sursound@music.vt.edu
  https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

  _______________________________________________
 Sursound mailing  list
 Sursound@music.vt.edu
  https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound



--

These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my  employer

Dave Malham
Music Research Centre
Department of  Music
The University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK
Phone  01904 322448
Fax     01904 322450
'Ambisonics - Component  Imaging for  Audio'
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing  list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

_____________________________________________________________________
The  University of Derby has a published policy regarding email and
reserves the right to monitor email traffic. If you believe this email was sent to
you in  error, please notify the sender and delete this email. Please
direct any  concerns to  info...@derby.ac.uk.
_______________________________________________
Sursound  mailing  list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
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/20120403/3448f07b/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound


--
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Reply via email to