On 02/05/2011 05:59, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:09 AM, Richard Dobson wrote:
...
what is all this talk about "smallest acceptable"?
Well, if I put together a proposal for an eight-speaker cube, which is ostensibly limited to first-order peri, would that be received with nodding of heads or derision? The horizontal relationships I understood a while back, and have even had the occasional opportunity to play with (I can even do six at home, in a too-small space, albeit with very unmatched speakers), but the business of including height has been far less well documented on this list, except for some very large and manifestly "permanent" multi-speaker installations - double layers of eight, etc. I have yet to hear any B-format with-height rendering of anything. It may yet prove to be totally impractical to run a mobile with-height rig to take into schools or arts centres (at least without a large team of assistants and hours to rig and de-rig), but one has to ask.
It may be worth making the point that I am not aiming to use this to play back refined B-format recordings of orchestras etc; but purely synthetic material representing collision events in the LHC, where the general direction of something reveals information about the physics, and where the mandated goal is to inspire kids with the science of the thing. If it inspires them to get interested in periphonic surround, that would be a bonus. It is primarily a science project, and would be funded most probably from a science outreach budget.
So all my questions are in relation not to a plain horizontal rig but to the simplest viable affordable way to set up a with-height one. I would happily settle for a whopping 20 degrees of separation. But unfortunately, for the physics increasing distance from the interaction point is equally important (we currently represent distance by time - a "scan" of the detector). That could be tricky, to say the least. May be impossible (though I will aim to include some form of hrtf decoding VEP-style over headphones as well). Something a bit like fireworks. It would be nice if a plain cube would be "good enough to give an idea of it". But if that really is totally unrealistic, I am better off not trying for with-height at all, as setting up a really large array is physically impractical as well as prohibitively expensive; I will leave that to the Allosphere people (at least until the Science Museum can be persuaded to build it). I would like something sufficient to work as "proof of concept", while clearly acknowledging that a bigger budget etc is needed to "do it full justice".
.. ..
i'm pretty sure that the effect you heard was not due to the performance of first-order ambisonics, but rather * because you had visual cues (the reinforcement system may have created a sense of striking "nearness", and your visual system filled in the localisation), and * because you're an ambi fanboy. that's not meant in any derogatory sense. i've been flabbergasted time and again how people could be totally unimpressed by first-oeder ambisonic systems that to me were between "pretty good" and "totally awesome".
Well, indeed. The show I went to was not in any sense "showy", the diffusion was in lots of ways subtle and if anything understated, just there as a quasi-PA to support the performers. It was the ultimate lesson in how "reinforcement" should/could be done. I had already been to enough iffy e/a concerts (to say nothing of Glastonbury and the odd rock gig) to appreciate the differences. The sweet spot was clearly wide enough, as I was very off-centre and even somewhat high up; certainly above the level of the singers. I was in fact ~expecting~ it to be wrong at my position, given what I then knew or thought I knew about Ambisonics (which was entirely first-order stuff at that time - hadn't even heard of "order" as such), and remember being very surprised at how good the localisation was way off-centre.
it's still a conjecture, and i haven't tried to confirm it experimentally, but i'm convinced that lower-order ambisonic listening takes training - when your brain has learned to discard all the bogus cues, the curtain opens.
Fair enough - most listening takes practice, at least, anyway, if not actually 'training'. I am personally very un-visual, so the visual aspects are a major distraction for me, and I habitually listen to concerts with eyes closed unless I have some other reason to peek.
..
what people want is to feel like single speakers are shouting abuse at them, and our way to world domination is to deliver that first, and then gently show them why their current frame of reference is defined by the shortcomings of the system leading the market, not by any actual necessity or aesthetic choice.
Hmm, well, I am not at all sure I do want to feel that, but I am open to being persuaded when the opportunity arises!
Richard Dobson _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
