On 4 Dec 2013, at 17:00, sursound-requ...@music.vt.edu wrote: > > > Message: 14 > Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 07:02:01 -0700 > From: John Abram <johnbab...@gmail.com> > To: s...@mchapman.com, Surround Sound discussion group > <sursound@music.vt.edu> > Subject: Re: [Sursound] DeWolfe Library Music - Ambisonics confusion > Message-ID: > <cahjctefbvycnshjux_3c6yddvjexs9bhgfcdt1kqtmjoqmv...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On 4 December 2013 04:31, Michael Chapman <s...@mchapman.com> wrote: > >> I would say "ambisonics" is a 'dictionary word' (though I haven't looked >> in any dictionaries). >> > > I found this in the Dictionary Application on my mac: > > ambisonic |?ambi?s?nik|adjectivedenoting or relating to a high-fidelity > audio system that reproduces the directional and acoustic properties of > recorded sound using two or more channels.noun ( ambisonics) [treated as > sing. ]ambisonic reproduction or systems.ORIGIN 1970s: from Latin ambi- ?on > both sides? + sonic . > > -- > with best wishes, John
Peter Fellgett was instrumental in achieving the first inclusion of 'ambisonic' in, AFAIR, the Collins dictionary and argued that it was generic, just as 'stereo' is. NRDC tried to register 'ambisonic' in the 1970s but this was refused, probably because it was already seen as generic, due to PBF's influence. They did register 'ambison', but this was dropped at some stage, or maybe passed to Nimbus with the rest of the portfolio. Of course anybody can try and register any word and, just like a patent, it stays valid until somebody successfully contests it, if it is allowed to start with. Geoffrey -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20131204/a69cb29b/attachment.html> _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
