--On 31 March 2012 18:34 -0700 Robert Greene 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 listenin
part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120401/32fffd7b/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120401/32fffd7b/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listin
On Sun, April 1, 2012 5:20 am, Paul Hodges wrote:
> 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
Out of interest - what research has been done on this where the
listeners were lying down? Do they hear such sounds still as "above",
or behind their heads? And, in the same vein, one the degree of such
perception with respect to intensity?
Richard Dobson
On 01/04/2012 12:56, Robert Greene
Richard Dobson wrote:
Out of interest - what research has been done on this where the
listeners were lying down?
The subject is not my area, but I know of an old paper:
James Lackner: Influence of Posture on the Spatial Localization of Sound
http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=4554
Eero
Thanks for the ref. Pity, it is AES, which I am not a member of, and $20
is a lot to pay for a 29-yr-old paper of mostly anecdotal interest :-(
Richard Dobson
On 01/04/2012 13:36, Eero Aro wrote:
Richard Dobson wrote:
Out of interest - what research has been done on this where the
listeners w
quot; in psychological terms.
Now we can "play with" sounds . . . which is of course what electronic
music, home studios and, I suspect, this mailing list are all about.
Yes, this also begs the question of what then become the new "ground" of
our experience!
Mark S
y pursued this goal, did anyone ever
seriously try to tackle the center speaker issue for music?
Mark Stahlman
Brooklyn NY
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/201204
On 04/01/2012 11:55 AM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
I am getting a many opinions on this as possible and I have now heard
various answers. It specifically relates to boosted band and, in this
scenario, elevation cues in the median plane . Blauert's 1969 experiment
showed that if an if a narrow band n
n/private/sursound/attachments/20120401/ee3933da/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursou
There are quite a few free downloadable files on the 2l.no website
that are worth exploring. Not Ambisonic, but good sound and exciting
playing. A pity the website is not easier to navigate. There is a
mini drop down menu at the top. Click on "Test Bench HD audio files".
David
At 17:00 31
bbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20120401/ee3933da/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
__
Hi
A pity the website is not easier to navigate
Yes, they have made it as difficult as possible..
Here is a more clear site of the Immortal Nysted record:
http://www.2l.musiconline.no/shop/displayAlbum.asp?id=29968
The last track, Immortal Bach is one of the best 5.0 recordings I have
ever h
again to anyone who says things like "ambisonics cant compete with 5.1
please bear in mind this is like saying "amplitude panning can't
compete with 5.1 - it doesnt make any sense at all. You mix your
tracks horizontally ,without elevation, using ambisonics plugins and
burn your ac3/dts file like a
On 04/01/2012 09:05 PM, Augustine Leudar wrote:
again to anyone who says things like "ambisonics cant compete with 5.1
please bear in mind this is like saying "amplitude panning can't
compete with 5.1 - it doesnt make any sense at all. You mix your
tracks horizontally ,without elevation, using am
I don't think anyone thinks that! What people do think
is that Ambisonics needs some sort of commercial accesibility--
which it could get if discs were put out that provided not
abstract Ambisonics as it were but Ambisonics as decoded
to the 5.1 set up. The message was that no one (statistically
I agree totally with Robert here.
Most of my work mates have 5.1 set-ups at home, but would never be
bothered to have anything that required more thought, so bring on the
5.1 mixes of ambisonic source material and at least let the masses get a
listen.
Cheers, Neil
On 4/1/2012 6:44 PM, Rober
At 18:28 01/04/2012, Neil Waterman wrote:
I agree totally with Robert here.
Most of my work mates have 5.1 set-ups at home, but would never be
bothered to have anything that required more thought, so bring on
the 5.1 mixes of ambisonic source material and at least let the
masses get a listen
OK I thought that was a good idea, for people to say what they thought
was good and not good about Ambisonics. So here I go(first I guess
but my mother always said Act in haste, repent at leisure. I think
she meant it as cautionary but I have always taken it as advisory!).
Good
1 Elegant as math
Um. Every single recording on Ambisonia was available as a
DTS-CD RIFF/WAV file of a 4.0 decode (that is, Center and LFE were
silent). All one needed to do was burn them to a CD and play in a DVD
player connected to a 5.1 home theater set up. See Richard Elen's
article "Getting Ambisoni
21 matches
Mail list logo
