> It is true that 1st order ambisonics doesn't consider distance, with all 
sources being reproduced at the distance of the speakers,
.....
> synthesis, the ambisonic encoding equations do not include distance,

Both of these are untrue.

For the second, see the Appendix of BLaH3 "Is my decoder Ambisonic?" Heller 
et al, AES San Francisco, 2008

There are two convenient proofs of the fallacy of the first.

While making a normal recording, creep silently up to your TetraMic or 
Soundfield and whisper into it.

When you play this back to an unsuspecting victim seated in the centre of a 
simple Classic Ambisonic rig, he will flinch.  He certainly doesn't hear 
you at the radius of the speakers.

The other 'proof' is the B-format motorcycle that Soundfield have played at 
nauseum at various shows.  Ambisonic myth has it that this was recorded by 
the young Dr. Peter Lennox on Grand Vizier Malham's modified Calrec 
Soundfield Mk 3A while the Vizier was away on a diplomatic visit to the   
Great Turtle that Supports the Universe.  This mike was one of the first to 
have IMHO, the proper EQ which allow a Soundfield to implement the correct 
Ambisonic Encoding Eqns in the Appendix of BLaH3.

BTW, real human distance perception is TERRIBLE under anechoic conditions 
cos waveform curvature is about the only thing left.  Those of you 
investigating distance perception, please take note.

And you need a proper Classic Ambi decoder as defined by MAG and BLaH3 with 
NFC.
_________________

Why does this work?

At LF, simple 1st order Ambisonics with NFC IS a wavefield / soundfield 
reconstruction system.

Then there's the snake oil in Calrec Soundfields, hand squeezed from solid 
Unobtainium by Yorkshire virgins ...  Shaddup Lee!  Just Shaddup!

_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound

Reply via email to