Hi Robert,
On 24.01.2011, at 06:26, Robert Greene wrote:
> Does anyone really like the sound of the human voice
> from four inches away for example?
Actually that's quite a distance ;-)
Really, spot miking can come in handy. Sometimes you want to capture an
intimacy that can only be had at clos
Of course. Except that when everyone makes recordings
the wrong way, then people are likely to prefer
the recordings played back a complementary wrong
way. Why would anyone want to hear most
commercial recordings as they actually are?
Does anyone really like the sound of the human voice
from fou
I have a photo of my great grandfather's house
in Germany with my great grandfather standing in
front of it. Try that with a digital photo on
a memory stick in a hundred years(which is roughly
how old the photo is--a bit older actually).
Books, pictures, records endure. Digital information
is he
On 23 Jan 2011, at 23:52, Robert Greene wrote:
> Of course this completely ignored the fact
> that in blind testing years ago,
> everyone preferred cassettes of vinyl
> to vinyl itself(which ought to have
> told people something about the recording
> industry's recording practices).
Sounds like t
Definitely not, and none of the things that were
recorded that way will be playable except by archivists.
But that is fair enough since none of the music
being provided that way will be of any interest
to anyone except cultural(using the word loosely)
historians anyway.
Robert
On Sun, 23 Jan 20
Actually, I think the remarks below represent a bit of
a misconception about stereo
playback. In actuality, if one used more speakers
one could make stereo playback better in the sense
that one could widen the spot in which it sounded
reasonably correct.
In actuality, if one sits absolutely sti
Of course this completely ignored the fact
that in blind testing years ago,
everyone preferred cassettes of vinyl
to vinyl itself(which ought to have
told people something about the recording
industry's recording practices).
Robert
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, dave.mal...@york.ac.uk wrote:
On Jan 23 2
On 01/23/2011 03:48 PM, Eero Aro wrote:
In my opinion, you can skip the on-going discussion about UHJ, it's more or
less academic. UHJ was developed in the 1980's, at the time when vinyl LP
and FM radio were the most important carriers. UHJ isn't needed anymore.
i beg to differ. it is still ve
On 01/23/2011 02:53 PM, f...@kokkinizita.net wrote:
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 12:39:19AM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
http://stackingdwarves.net/public_stuff/linux_audio/tmt10/TMT2010_J%c3%b6rn_Nettingsmeier-Higher_order_Ambisonics-Slides.pdf
Nice ! But I don't really agree with some of the
True, so true - not something I'd choose, but.
I'll go downstairs and wind up my HMV Gramophone from 1905,
it's still working. Will my mp3 player do the same after 100 years?
Eero
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.
On Jan 23 2011, Eero Aro wrote:
Dave,
I find a paradox in your sentence:
who wants to use vinyl (or even cassette!) for aesthetic reasons
Aesthetic, vinyl - yes! Agree.
But cassette !!!??? What?
Well, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder :-)
True, so true - not something I'd choose,
Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 01/23/2011 01:41 AM, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
In fact, the introduced "system" might deliver better results than say
Dolby Pro Logic IIz.
that's like saying "this new car model is a lot faster than a dead
whale on the beach" :-D
This is a cool analogy...
Dave,
I find a paradox in your sentence:
who wants to use vinyl (or even cassette!) for aesthetic reasons
Aesthetic, vinyl - yes! Agree.
But cassette !!!??? What?
Well, the beauty is in the eye of the beholder :-)
Eero
___
Sursound mailing list
S
On Jan 23 2011, dave.mal...@york.ac.uk wrote:
that there are no stereo cylinder players as I'm sure someone would want
that too - see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10171129
or better yet -
http://www.touchmusic.org.uk/news/the_wire_wax_cylinders_and_evp.html - wax
cylinders are clearly the wave
On 23 Jan 2011, at 13:50, dave.mal...@york.ac.uk wrote:
> On Jan 23 2011, Eero Aro wrote:
>
>
>> In my opinion, you can skip the on-going discussion about UHJ, it's more or
>> less academic. UHJ was developed in the 1980's, at the time when vinyl LP
>> and FM radio were the most important carri
On Jan 23 2011, Eero Aro wrote:
In my opinion, you can skip the on-going discussion about UHJ, it's more or
less academic. UHJ was developed in the 1980's, at the time when vinyl LP
and FM radio were the most important carriers. UHJ isn't needed anymore.
Unless, of course, you are a musician
On 23/01/2011 5:25 a.m., Justin Bennett wrote:
Snip
I have a simple 4 channel ambi decoder programmed into the
built- in mixer of my computer's sound card. I just choose the preset, play
the 4 channel B-format file and it decodes it for me.
Would you mind giving out the details of this, or is i
Augustine Leudar wrote:
> Im sure Im missing something obvious here but humour me. With a stereo
> signal I can just place two speakers in a line and have my stereo signal
> send two discrete channels to each speakers, each channel representiong one
> channel of my stereo microphone. The same wit
Anyone who would like an introduction to spherical harmonics
expansions could have a look at this(which I wrote myself)
http://www.regonaudio.com/SphericalHarmonics.pdf
as an introduction for audio people.
It is perhaps worth noting that spherical harmonics
(and Fourier expansion of periodic fun
Gus
As Fons already said, there is information available about Ambisonics.
First check out these two sites:
http://martin_leese.tripod.com/Ambisonic/
http://www.ambisonic.net/
In quadrophic systems the angle between adjacent speakers is
90 degrees (or more), which isn't enough to create stabile
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 12:39:19AM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> http://stackingdwarves.net/public_stuff/linux_audio/tmt10/TMT2010_J%c3%b6rn_Nettingsmeier-Higher_order_Ambisonics-Slides.pdf
Nice ! But I don't really agree with some of the reasoning :-)
There's a logical 'jump' in there whic
Hi everyone, Hippy New Ears! Is anyone else using ambisonics or
sursound for sonification? If so, check this out [ apologies for
doubles], David
Call for Participation
The 17th International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD)
Hotel Mercure Buda
Budapest, Hungary
June 20-24, 2011
UR
Hi Gus,
of course you can do what you suggest, but, speaking practically,
ambisonic recording, encoding and decoding makes it possible to,
for instance, go out into the field with one microphone, and record in
(only) four channels. Later, depending on the situation, I can decide
whether to listen
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 06:24:23PM -0800, Danny McCarty wrote:
> >> Now this isn't too condescending is it?
I certainly wasn't meant to be. From the question it was quite
clear that the original poster started with zero of very little
background on AMB. Taking note of this is not a reflection on
On 01/23/2011 01:41 AM, Stefan Schreiber wrote:
In fact, the introduced "system" might deliver better results than say
Dolby Pro Logic IIz.
that's like saying "this new car model is a lot faster than a dead whale
on the beach" :-D
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49
25 matches
Mail list logo
