I have idea of how hrtfs could be individually measured and could work on a commercial scale with minimum inconvenience to the public (so they might actually use it ). Not sure who to talk to about htis though.
On 24 January 2016 at 19:31, Stefan Schreiber <[email protected]> wrote: > http://www.blueripplesound.com/hrtf-amber > > The IRCAM AKG "Listen" HRTF data contains measured HRTFs from about 50 >> different people - this must have taken a lot of effort and we're very >> grateful to the good folk of IRCAM for doing the work and making the >> results available to the world! What we've done is analyse this data and >> come up with an 'average' HRTF that is a sensible compromise, using some >> new work. As it's an average, it wouldn't be perfect for any of the people >> actually measured, but hopefully not awful for any of them either! It's >> certainly much better than conventional "panning" techniques. >> > > > (See also: > > http://www.blueripplesound.com/personalized-hrtfs > ) > > We provide "generic" HRTFs models (for instance, our Amber HRTF < >> http://www.blueripplesound.com/hrtf-amber>) which work well for many >> people, but even better results can be achieved using personalized HRTF >> measurements. >> > > > Could any people, companies or institutions on this list provide access to > such a practical and < usable > generic HRTF model? > > If not: I believe that some essential theses and papers should have been > done in the academic world, but don't exist anyway. > > Richard Furse basically states that a "good" generic HRTF is derived from > many HRTF measurements (data sets) via some form of averaging, as a > "sensible compromise". I doubt that this is a trivial process, though... > > Best regards, > > Stefan > > > P.S.: VR companies will currently have to look into these issues, and to > find solutions which are practical at least < for most > people. If some > proposed HRTF data set doesn't fit to an individual listener it should be > pretty hard to distinguish between front/back sources, for example. (Even > with head-tracking.) > > Don't tell me that I didn't present a paper to prove my point... Instead, > give me the link to a paper which delivers some kind of optimized generic > HRTF data set. If such a paper doesn't exist (yet), I don't see any reason > why something like "Amber HRTF" can't be re-engineered. > (Amber HRTF itself is derived from IRCAM AKG "Listen" HRTF data, a public > available list. And even IRCAM should be interested to provide a good > universal HRTF based on its own and public HRTF research!) > _______________________________________________ > Sursound mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, > edit account or options, view archives and so on. > -- www.augustineleudar.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20160124/cbaadecb/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list [email protected] https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
