It's implied, but not really explicitly given in
'Ambisonics Encoding of Other Audio Formats for Multiple Listening Conditions' by Daniel, Jérome;
Rault, Jean-Bernard; Polack, Jean-Dominique
AES Convention:105 (September 1998) Paper Number:4795.
I think there's a corrected version on Jerome's website.
Dave
On 09/07/2012 22:11, Eric Benjamin wrote:
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
for anything based on energy> vectors the angle between the speakers can't be
too big.
Is there a good reference for that important point?
Eric
----- Original Message ----
From: Fons Adriaensen <f...@linuxaudio.org>
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Sent: Mon, July 9, 2012 6:48:40 AM
Subject: Re: [Sursound] higher order ambisonics over 8 to 10 loudspeakers
On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:13:04PM +1000, GP wrote:
If the min is (N+1)².
Surely for 3rd order that is
(3+1)² = 16 speakers?
The minimum is (M + 1)^2 for 3D, and (2 * M) + 1 for 2D, but
- You better use at least on more,
- For 3D, the minimum is 8, even for first order. That is because
the the equations above assume a systematic decoder, but a decoder
should be systematic only at LF, and for anything based on energy
vectors the angle between the speakers can't be too big.
Ciao,
--
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 322448 */
/* Heslington Fax 01904 322450 */
/* 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
