On 2013-05-03, Iain Mott wrote:
Theoretically then, for a given listening position (for which we position a mic in order make impulse responses), if we make impulse responses for every possible location in the space, it would be possible to spatialise a sound with both angular and distance cues, through a process of convolution with the various impulse responses and subsequent ambisonic decoding?
Yes. The main difference to binaural work is that the responses are considerably longer and capture all of the room acoustical cues as well. That means they are even less safe to sum to each other than HRTFs, and harder to decompose, so interpolating between them is likely out of the question. Also, at progressively higher orders you start to capture some spatial detail as well, which would eventually lead to proper auditory parallax when the channel count goes into the hundreds -- a potential further cue. Unfortunately we're nowhere near anything like that at the moment. Sources inside the rig are also a bit problematic because their nearfield has considerable amounts of higher order energy, which reject with variable (and often unquantified) success.
-- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - de...@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front +358-50-5756111, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2 _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
