Fons Adriaensen a écrit :
>On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 09:29:02PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>> On 03/24/2011 09:21 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>>
>>> With just 2 more speakers (4 + 6 + 4 + 1) you would not only have
>>> better first order but also the option to reproduce in full 2nd
>>> order
Hello David,
This sounds great! Congrats in getting the resources together to make this
happen.
I see there have been a number of comments regarding possible set ups--I'll add
a few thoughts here as I've been thinking about putting together a 2nd order
system. I was thinking of something alon
> The modification I was thinking of would be to bring the 6 speakers on stands
> into a hexagon on a plane.
> Why? It makes it easy > to set up--but more importantly, I'd now have two
> speakers set up at +/-60deg
> for stereo compatible playback. OR,
> it is also possible to do a bit more re
ailing 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/20110325/de8e87a1/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
On 03/25/2011 05:29 PM, Anthony Palomba wrote:
So just to review things...
I would like to take a multichannel performance and encode it in
an ambisonic format, then decode it and send it to multiple speakers.
you might be interested in a paper i did for last year's ambisonic
symposium, which
When I was the R&D teaboy at Wharfedale in the late 70's, I tried stereo in our
anechoic chamber; expecting great things w/o pesky room reflections. The
results were terrible; poor stereo sound as well as formal localisation which
was the reason for the experiment. Both much poorer than in a nor
