That's an interesting one. In the early days of Ambisonics, a bi-rectangular array was often
mentioned as having advantages. A horizontal rectangle, narrow dimension being left-right as that a
normal stereo pair is also available in the same array, plus a vertical left-right rectangle which
supposed to help with the stability of the side images.
Dave
On 03/05/2011 14:45, umashankar mantravadi wrote:
in fact angelo recommended that i arrange the eight speakers as two crossed
squares. two speakers in front and back, and four speakers mid bottom left and
right and mid top left and right, the only problem is i do not see a readymade
decoder
umashankar
i have published my poems. read (or buy) at http://stores.lulu.com/umashankar
From: r...@cubiculum.com
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 14:54:25 +0200
To: richarddob...@blueyonder.co.uk; sursound@music.vt.edu
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Minim AD7 for sale
On 3 May 2011, at 13:08, Richard Dobson wrote:
My proposed application is not music listening as such, but sonification of particle
collisions in the LHC. In the data, Z is the beam axis, and the most interesting stuff
has high transverse momentum, i.e. left right up down across the beam axis. I can do a
great deal just with horizontal surround (the most obvious way of sonifying bipolar data,
of which there is a lot), but most collisions are very obviously 3D in space.
"Normally", jets are formed in symmetrical pairs e.g. one hard left, one hard
right, but recently they have found some instances where the jets were not exactly in
opposite directions, indicating (possibly) some new physics. So it will be important to
tell if two sounds are exactly opposite (180 deg in effect), or at a narrower angle.
There may be situations where being able to rotate the soundfield in the classic B-Format
way in order to choose an alternative listener orientation would be useful.
Sure, in such a scenario you'd of course want Z-axis info, too. But then you
may also need a more precise and stable localization. Naive guess would be
something like two rings of six speakers at different horizontal levels would
be a reasonable minimum.
Here's a question for the experts:
If one considers a cube arrangement as a minimum for 3D playback, which could be
interpreted as two rings of four speakers at different horizontal levels, then why would
one choose a cube over e.g. two "rings" of four speakers that are not only at
different horizontal levels, but rotated by 45deg against each other. In other words, a
setup that in projection wouldn't be a square, but an octagon?
Ronald
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing 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/20110503/66b29baf/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
--
These are my own views and may or may not be shared by my employer
/*********************************************************************/
/* Dave Malham http://music.york.ac.uk/staff/research/dave-malham/ */
/* Music Research Centre */
/* Department of Music "http://music.york.ac.uk/"; */
/* The University of York Phone 01904 432448 */
/* Heslington Fax 01904 432450 */
/* York YO10 5DD */
/* UK 'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio' */
/* "http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/mustech/3d_audio/"; */
/*********************************************************************/
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
