[Sursound] 3 PhD Studentships at the University of Huddersfield, England
Dear all I think this might interest some of you. Beware that the first of the three is limited to AHRC's admissibility criteria, which has something to do with being a UK resident - make sure to check the link in the brief. Good luck to all. pa > We have three funded PhD studentships starting in October 2013 at the > University of Huddersfield, England. > > 1. AHRC funded studentship of £13,590 pa + fees (any > music/performance/technology/ea discipline) > 2. Centre for Research in New Music PhD in association with the Huddersfield > Contemporary Music Festival £5,000 pa + fees + £750 pa research expenses > (composer) > 3. Centre for Research in New Music PhD in association with Sound and Music : > British Music Collection Scholarship £5,000 pa + fees + £750 pa research > expenses (composer or musicologist) > > Further details are on the attached PDF. > -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Huddersfield_PhD Scholarships_2013.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 155848 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130201/4fca5cf4/attachment.pdf> -- next part -- ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural
1983 was the first binaural haircut I heard. It was billed as "Holophonics", I think, but really it was binaural - I think (glad to be corrected if anyone knows) Dr. Peter Lennox School of Technology, Faculty of Arts, Design and Technology University of Derby, UK e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk t: 01332 593155 -Original Message- From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of etienne deleflie Sent: 01 February 2013 00:40 To: Surround Sound discussion group Subject: Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural What's interesting is that the demo is actually totally cheating. It relies on cognitive cues, perhaps even more than on presenting realistic stimuli. It does this in two ways: Firstly, it extensively uses symbolism, through language, to create expectations of spatial experience... "now over here on the left ... now on the right", and "these scissors are very close to your head ...". etc. Secondly, it relies on experience-based referential cues. The successful perception of distance, in the sound of the scissors, can be at least partly (if not mostly) attributable to the fact that we can only hear scissors if they are close to our ears. When you hear scissors, you always get an impression of proximity. Begault (2000) makes this point in his text "3D sound for virtual reality and multimedia" ... and funnily enough, he speaks specifically of 3D demos where there is "the sound of scissors cutting hair, as if very near your ear." !!! (Page 29) ... so, as far as binaural demos goes, I'm going to call the sound of scissors "the oldest trick in the book" (its been around at least 12 years!) The other examples he gives are the sound of lighting a cigarette and drinking a glass of water. It is also for this reason that any demonstration that includes whispering, to demonstrate ability to create cues of proximity, should also be treated as somewhat bogus. Alternatively, for the spatial music composer, if the composer would like to create a sense of proximity in space they dont need to encode sounds using any particular spatialisation technology, they just need to use the sounds that we only hear in proximity ... such as whispering, scissors, matches and drinking a glass of water! Actually, to my mind, this very point is one of the big issues with the strategy of 'mimicking reality' to create realistic perceptions of space. The cognitive dimension is largely ignored. And so really ... the 'oldest trick in the book' is perhaps more of a rather sensible strategy. Although once you try to encode a sound that is not typically heard near the ears, then you are stuffed. Etienne On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Dave Malham wrote: > For a truly cring-making demo of binaural, check out the "Virtual > Barber Shop" video at > > http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Surround_sound_vs_3D_sound-article- > fand_sound_feb2013-html.aspx > . > Can't say it works much better (if at all) than any other I've heard > in 4 decades in the business. It would also be interesting to know > what people think of the demo further down the page of the crosstalk > cancelled stuff that's supposed to work on laptops - it's barely > perceivable as stereo on my MacBook Pro. > > Dave > > -- > As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this > disclaimer is redundant > > > These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer > > Dave Malham > Ex-Music Research Centre > Department of Music > The University of York > Heslington > York YO10 5DD > UK > > 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' > ___ > Sursound mailing list > Sursound@music.vt.edu > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > -- http://etiennedeleflie.net -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130201/e78873d7/attachment.html> ___ 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
Re: [Sursound] Maximum number of output channels possible in onesingle pc today ?
A 25/01/2013, às 16:10, Charlie Richmond escreveu: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:01 AM, John Leonard wrote: > >> If you mean the SunRize Indistries AD512, that was track-count, rather >> than outputs, wasn't it? Or was there an add-on? Mine was only two channels >> in and out. >> > > Ah yes, SunRize Industries... > > They did come out with two multichannel extenders, although I'm not sure if > the last one was 16 or 12 channels. Also, we only saw them in prototype > form at their offices in silicon valley so not really sure how much market > penetration they had. I remember when they ceased operation and the > principal said he was being hired to work as a developer for a database > company (Lyris?) making about 10 times as much as he was at SunRize so he > could not be persuaded to keep on... > > Charlie Very interesting stuff. This page says it was possible to go up to 15 channels with multiple cards: http://www.amiga-hardware.com/showhardware.cgi?HARDID=1292 best, Miguel ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural
Here's my binaural haircut from 1999/2000: http://reverberant.com/cl/video.htm Iain Em Sex, 2013-02-01 às 11:34 +, Peter Lennox escreveu: > 1983 was the first binaural haircut I heard. It was billed as "Holophonics", > I think, but really it was binaural - I think (glad to be corrected if anyone > knows) > > Dr. Peter Lennox > > School of Technology, > Faculty of Arts, Design and Technology > University of Derby, UK > e: p.len...@derby.ac.uk > t: 01332 593155 > > -Original Message- > From: sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu [mailto:sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On > Behalf Of etienne deleflie > Sent: 01 February 2013 00:40 > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Subject: Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural > > What's interesting is that the demo is actually totally cheating. It relies > on cognitive cues, perhaps even more than on presenting realistic stimuli. > It does this in two ways: > > Firstly, it extensively uses symbolism, through language, to create > expectations of spatial experience... "now over here on the left ... now on > the right", and "these scissors are very close to your head ...". etc. > > Secondly, it relies on experience-based referential cues. The successful > perception of distance, in the sound of the scissors, can be at least partly > (if not mostly) attributable to the fact that we can only hear scissors if > they are close to our ears. When you hear scissors, you always get an > impression of proximity. > > Begault (2000) makes this point in his text "3D sound for virtual reality and > multimedia" ... and funnily enough, he speaks specifically of 3D demos where > there is "the sound of scissors cutting hair, as if very near your ear." !!! > (Page 29) ... so, as far as binaural demos goes, I'm going to call the sound > of scissors "the oldest trick in the book" (its been around at least 12 > years!) > > The other examples he gives are the sound of lighting a cigarette and > drinking a glass of water. It is also for this reason that any demonstration > that includes whispering, to demonstrate ability to create cues of proximity, > should also be treated as somewhat bogus. > > Alternatively, for the spatial music composer, if the composer would like to > create a sense of proximity in space they dont need to encode sounds using > any particular spatialisation technology, they just need to use the sounds > that we only hear in proximity ... such as whispering, scissors, matches and > drinking a glass of water! > > Actually, to my mind, this very point is one of the big issues with the > strategy of 'mimicking reality' to create realistic perceptions of space. > The cognitive dimension is largely ignored. And so really ... the 'oldest > trick in the book' is perhaps more of a rather sensible strategy. Although > once you try to encode a sound that is not typically heard near the ears, > then you are stuffed. > > Etienne > > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Dave Malham wrote: > > > For a truly cring-making demo of binaural, check out the "Virtual > > Barber Shop" video at > > > > http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Surround_sound_vs_3D_sound-article- > > fand_sound_feb2013-html.aspx > > . > > Can't say it works much better (if at all) than any other I've heard > > in 4 decades in the business. It would also be interesting to know > > what people think of the demo further down the page of the crosstalk > > cancelled stuff that's supposed to work on laptops - it's barely > > perceivable as stereo on my MacBook Pro. > > > > Dave > > > > -- > > As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this > > disclaimer is redundant > > > > > > These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer > > > > Dave Malham > > Ex-Music Research Centre > > Department of Music > > The University of York > > Heslington > > York YO10 5DD > > UK > > > > 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' > > ___ > > Sursound mailing list > > Sursound@music.vt.edu > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > > > > > > -- > http://etiennedeleflie.net > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130201/e78873d7/attachment.html> > ___ >
Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural
--On 31 January 2013 17:20 + Dave Malham wrote: > For a truly cring-making demo of binaural, check out the "Virtual > Barber Shop" video at > http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Surround_sound_vs_3D_sound-article > -fand_sound_feb2013-html.aspx. Can't say it works much better (if at > all) than any other I've heard in 4 decades in the business. Cringe-making for sure; but for me it was the most convincing full surround from headphones that I've heard. In particular I had none of the front/back ambiguity that I associate with these things, in spite of the fact that there were no verbal clues given for that (just for left and right). I suspect that the acoustic of the room being very similar to that of where I'm sitting helped, especially with the illusion of distance. Paul -- Paul Hodges ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
[Sursound] NOT The Barber of Seville
Howdy All (Authentic Western Greeting): I have to add my two bits on "How not to advertise binaural." I've heard the barbershop demo as well as a plethora of the more ubiquitous helicopter demos. My delicate and politically correct way of putting it is this: They all suck, and in more ways than one. I got into Ambisonics because people doing peer-reviewed studies on hearing were using equally-crappy stimuli to study, in a laboratory environment, various processing strategies for cochlear implant and hearing aid devices. At least the sentences (e.g. IEEE 5-word sentences) weren't providing cognitive clues. I've been a proponent of providing the physical reconstruction of waves, and letting the listener use subtle cues such as head movements to determine sound-source direction, distance, or clarity. Physical realism shouldn't include psychoacoustical clues such as ILDs or ITDs until you stick a head (plus brain) into the acoustical environment; i.e. let the brain, person, or processor act on the physical space. Don't create stimuli (at least for legitimate research) that includes such clues unless you're studying effects of a particular parameter. Nothing's going to be perfect in the lab, but wave field synthesis, Ambisonics, etc. provide a way of capturing a dynamic environment (compared to stand-alone monaural sources arbitrarily panned around the room). I've used HRTFs and IRs as a way of (poorly) demonstrating the potential of Ambisonics, but fear that I've done an injustice in the process. I use EAR insert earphones (which totally obliterate ear canal resonance--which is good if KEMAR already accentuated them!), Sennheiser HDA 200 audiometric phones (great for estimating SPL based on voltage level for the average listener), AKG studio phones, and Sony DJ phones. All give a different presentation that goes beyond tonal characteristics or timbre. But back to those binaural and transaural demos... When it comes to binaural demos, parts of sounds remain in-the-head, whereas other components of the auditory scene move about as they should. In the end, they amuse and captivate first-time listeners, but that's about it. I heard one transaural demo that wasn't at all bad, but the sweet spot was so small that shifting position in a chair threw the illusion off. For me, sound in space from a surround of loudspeakers rules. This isn't portable, so giving a demo of Ambisonics requires that the listener has access to the requisite equipment. Hard to find those listeners... Best to all, ELC Eric Carmichel Cochlear Concepts I take full responsibility for my opinions, and have eaten my words more than once. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130201/6aaa701b/attachment.html> ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] 3 PhD Studentships at the University of Huddersfield England
> disclaimer is redundant > > > > > > These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer > > > > Dave Malham > > Ex-Music Research Centre > > Department of Music > > The University of York > > Heslington > > York YO10 5DD > > UK > > > > 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' > > ___ > > Sursound mailing list > > Sursound@music.vt.edu > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > > > > -- > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2013 11:39:33 +1100 > From: etienne deleflie > Subject: Re: [Sursound] how not to advertise binaural > To: Surround Sound discussion group > Message-ID: > kp...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > What's interesting is that the demo is actually totally cheating. It relies > on cognitive cues, perhaps even more than on presenting realistic stimuli. > It does this in two ways: > > Firstly, it extensively uses symbolism, through language, to create > expectations of spatial experience... "now over here on the left ... now on > the right", and "these scissors are very close to your head ...". etc. > > Secondly, it relies on experience-based referential cues. The successful > perception of distance, in the sound of the scissors, can be at least > partly (if not mostly) attributable to the fact that we can only hear > scissors if they are close to our ears. When you hear scissors, you always > get an impression of proximity. > > Begault (2000) makes this point in his text "3D sound for virtual reality > and multimedia" ... and funnily enough, he speaks specifically of 3D demos > where there is "the sound of scissors cutting hair, as if very near your > ear." !!! (Page 29) ... so, as far as binaural demos goes, I'm going to > call the sound of scissors "the oldest trick in the book" (its been around > at least 12 years!) > > The other examples he gives are the sound of lighting a cigarette and > drinking a glass of water. It is also for this reason that any > demonstration that includes whispering, to demonstrate ability to create > cues of proximity, should also be treated as somewhat bogus. > > Alternatively, for the spatial music composer, if the composer would like > to create a sense of proximity in space they dont need to encode sounds > using any particular spatialisation technology, they just need to use the > sounds that we only hear in proximity ... such as whispering, scissors, > matches and drinking a glass of water! > > Actually, to my mind, this very point is one of the big issues with the > strategy of 'mimicking reality' to create realistic perceptions of space. > The cognitive dimension is largely ignored. And so really ... the 'oldest > trick in the book' is perhaps more of a rather sensible strategy. Although > once you try to encode a sound that is not typically heard near the ears, > then you are stuffed. > > Etienne > > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Dave Malham > wrote: > > > For a truly cring-making demo of binaural, check out the "Virtual > > Barber Shop" video at > > > > > http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Surround_sound_vs_3D_sound-article-fand_sound_feb2013-html.aspx > > . > > Can't say it works much better (if at all) than any other I've heard > > in 4 decades in the business. It would also be interesting to know > > what people think of the demo further down the page of the crosstalk > > cancelled stuff that's supposed to work on laptops - it's barely > > perceivable as stereo on my MacBook Pro. > > > > Dave > > > > -- > > As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this > > disclaimer is redundant > > > > > > These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer > > > > Dave Malham > > Ex-Music Research Centre > > Department of Music > > The University of York > > Heslington > > York YO10 5DD > > UK > > > > 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' > > ___ > > Sursound mailing list > > Sursound@music.vt.edu > > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound > > > > > > -- > http://etiennedeleflie.net > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20130201/e78873
Re: [Sursound] NOT The Barber of Seville
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 10:16:37AM -0800, Eric Carmichel wrote: > For me, sound in space from a surround of loudspeakers rules. Couldn't agree more. For anything that works, the sound has to physically come from more or less the direction it is intended to be perceived. Which is something HOA does quite well. Most systems that try to deliver sound directly to the ears (this includes binaural, crosstalk cancellation etc.) ignore the fact that normally a listener is not clamped into a vise. Even binaural with head tracking only considers rotational movements, completely ignoring translational. The ability to move our two acoustic sensors leads to capablities that are often ignored when describing the way some system is supposed to work (or not work). For example front/back resolution (which is not disputed), but in theory also resolving phase ambiguities well above the usual 700 Hz or so limit, identifying reflections as such, etc. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Re: [Sursound] NOT The Barber of Seville
Hi On 1 February 2013 22:35, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > > Most systems that try to deliver sound directly to the ears > (this includes binaural, crosstalk cancellation etc.) ignore > the fact that normally a listener is not clamped into a vise. > Even binaural with head tracking only considers rotational > movements, completely ignoring translational. > That's not necessarily true in theory, but certainly is in practice :-) > The ability to move our two acoustic sensors leads to capablities > that are often ignored when describing the way some system is > supposed to work (or not work). For example front/back resolution > (which is not disputed), but in theory also resolving phase > ambiguities well above the usual 700 Hz or so limit, identifying > reflections as such, etc. > The other thing that is widely ignored is that our ears are not the only way we perceive sound - I'm sure (well, at least I hope) Eric will confirm that even profoundly deaf people can perceive (particularly low bass) sounds through their direct effects on our bodies, which simply aren't stimulated at all by headphone presentations. Dave -- As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University, so this disclaimer is redundant These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer Dave Malham Ex-Music Research Centre Department of Music The University of York Heslington York YO10 5DD UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' ___ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
