I should add diffusion can use one channel successfully over several
speakers for creative effect - but her eIm talking about the accuracy of
panning, point sources etc

On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 at 09:32, Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Stefan -  I think we may be getting crossed wires here (pun not intended)
>
> Me: *“one channel over several speakers sounds crap”*
> "
> You:  *"*
> *I would say your statement is just wrong.  We are following normal
> panning rules, which are proven in millions of *
> *recordings."*
>
> Stereo recordings have two channels, not one - unless you're referring to
> mono which of course can sound  fine with one channel on two speakers - but
> has no panning whatsoever
> But perhaps you are not understanding what I am saying or perhaps you are
> trolling me :) You suggest "just trying VBAP - well I first "just tried
> VBAP" fifteen years ago and have used it in literally hundreds of
> installations since and much prefer it to ambisonics in 90 percent of
> situations.- I literally use it for work nearly every day and its cousin
> DBAP and other forms of amplitude panning, day in day out so I do hope you
> take the time to actually understand what I am trying to say otherwise I
> fear this may be wasted time for both of us .
>
> "*Stereo to 4 speakers: You can’t map stereo to positions which are out
> of the stereo front*."
>
> You can and people do - but it sounds crap - which was my point - people
> upmix a stereo file to 5.1 for example in post houses all the time there is
> a variety of ways they do this and you can read about them here :
>
> https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-10546-3_28
>
> "*It is important to see that every position is panned to 2 speakers in *
> *2D, and (usually) 3 speakers in 3D.*"
> ????? Yes and no - stereo is panned to positions in 2 speakers of course
> but I would think more carefully about what 2D and 3D actually mean .......
> technically speaking - 3D just refers to 3 dimensions. 3D could refer to a
> million speakers, so could 2D actually. It's very rare for any kind of
> spatial audio to be rendered over 3 speakers though it happens. Whilst I
> know simple surround systems are referred to as 3D In reality the whole
> thing is a misnomer, 3D should include height and proximity. So a point
> source (1 speaker ) should be called 0D, Stereo should be called 1D - a
> line - quad/5.1 octaphonic/3 speakers you refer to should be called 2D as
> its just a flat surface- from then on we include height - Ambisonics when
> rendered with height, should, in my opinion, should be called 2.5 D as it
> cant really create proximity properly - aka sounds coming close to you.
> True 3D audio, where a sound can be anywhere in 3D space including sounds
> that come right up close to you can only be created by DBAP in my
> experience,  or other amplitude panning and perhaps binaural (not heard
> this convincingly yet)  though Matt Montags WFS with height system might be
> able to do it. More on the definition of dimensions :
>
> https://gadgetsthink.com/what-is-dimension-full-explained-1d-2d-3d-4d-etc/
>
> You could argue you could add height to 3 (or even 2 or 1) speakers using
> psychoacoustic effects , directional bands etc making it 3D - or you could
> stick one speaker up a lampost for height  - but that's another can of
> worms.  Recent "developments" in 4D, 8D audio etc etc are just marketing
> gimmicks.
>
> Anyway, - I am not talking about ambisonics or object-based panning (and
> yes object-based panning systems such as Atmos use amplitude panning in a
> system similar to VBAP but instead of a triangle of speakers uses a
> rectangular tesselation :
> https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2016210174A1/en) .
>  I am talking for want of a better expression amplitude panning and also
> the Scheoops type system at the beginning of this thread.
> Lets me try and explain things as clearly as possible.
> IF I have a stereo file in which a bird flies from one speaker to another
> and I simply "upmix" this stereo file by doubling it onto a quad array then
> the bird will be flying from the front left to the front right speaker AND
> the back left to the back right speaker - which willl sound crap, or at
> least not usually the desired effect .  So in the example of the Scheops
> setup - you have 8 hypercardioid speakers point to the 8 corners of the
> cube - each one of those channels is meant to go go to ONE speaker of a
> cube array. Ie each one of those mics and speakers covers one corner or an
> eighth of the 3D sound field. Let's go back to the bird. Say I have a bird
> happily staying in the top right speaker of my octaphonic cube as was
> recorded there by my mic or positioned there by mu panner.  If you
> suddenly get that top right corner channel of the octatonic cube and put it
> on two speakers instead of just the one it was originally meant to
> represent (aka upmixing) then the bird will no longer be an accurate point
> source in one place it will now be coming from two places, if those two
> speakers are in different trees - that bird will now be coming from two
> trees - aka the bird will suddenly be larger, or the imaging blurred and
> you might get lucky with precedence effect,this will apply to all panning
> in the sound scene too if you have upmixed all speakers, the further apart
> the speakers are the worse it will be.  For me this kind of thing is
> crucially important as I do walkaround installations that cannot have a
> "sweet spot".    So upmixing presents a problem for this type of 3D audio
> recordings - and perhaps less so for ambisonics. Now downmixing with this
> kind of recordings and composition actually works quite well and I have
> tried it many times when I've needed to send a rough mix to prospective
> clients and I am left with the daunting task of downmixing a 28 channel
> installation to a stereo file - you have to be very selective about which
> channels you use and the perspective of the listener. Funnily enough the
> stereo recordings I have downmixed from quad and octaphonic recordings
> sound strangely spacious. I hope this makes my point of view clear - it is
> quite simple and based on years of experience and research and is quite
> practical - things have to work or I don't get gigs and the public response
> is not good simple as that.
> Delightful as this conversation is I have to get back to work and will be
> offline for a bit - I bid you good day sir.
>
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 at 01:34, Stefan Schreiber <st...@mail.telepac.pt>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Stereo to 4 speakers: You can’t map stereo to positions which are out
>> of the stereo front.
>>
>> Octomic to 20 speakers: Should actually (and does) work, via simple
>> panning.
>>
>> It is important to see that every position is panned to 2 speakers in
>> 2D, and (usually) 3 speakers in 3D.
>> (If speakers should stay empty I don’t see any problem.)
>>
>> “one channel over several speakers sounds crap”
>>
>> We are following normal panning rules, which are proven in millions of
>> recordings. So I would say your statement is just wrong.
>>
>> You don’t spread “8 speakers over 20 speakers” in some statistical
>> ways, if that is what you meant.
>> So I just have suggested to “try” VBAP, obtaining some very reasonable
>> (and proven) results.
>>
>> Object and speaker panning is not very different, by the way.
>> (You can see the speakers also as objects. )
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Mensagem de Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com> ---------
>> Data: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 23:21:50 +0100
>> De: Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
>> Assunto: Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET
>> Para: Surround Sound discussion group <sursound@music.vt.edu>
>>
>>
>>
>> > I refer to mapping, for example, a stereo file to 4 speakers, an
>> octophonic
>> > to 20 speakers etc - one channel over several speakers sounds crap - so,
>> > for example, the bird that should be a point source coming out of one
>> > speaker is now coming  of three menaing th ebird i s no longer a point
>> > source etc etc - the same goes for panning so yes horribly blurred - Im
>> not
>> > talking about objects
>> >
>> > On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 at 13:44, Stefan Schreiber <st...@mail.telepac.pt>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> You < can > remap stereophonic recordings, via simple panning.
>> >>
>> >> Are audio objects “horribly blurred” if you render them? Don’t think
>> >> so...    ;-)
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Stefan
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Mensagem de Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
>> ---------
>> >> Data: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 12:33:34 +0100
>> >> De: Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
>> >> Assunto: Re: [Sursound] Recorder for ORTF-3D OUTDOOR SET
>> >> Para: Surround Sound discussion group <sursound@music.vt.edu>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > you can also get reasonably nice downmixes to quad and stereo by
>> >> combining
>> >> > channels as well . However, the problem with Scheops type systemsI
>> see is
>> >> > upmixing rather than downmixing. YOur basically spreadinge signal
>> over
>> >> > several speakers when you do that which blurs localisation horrible-
>> and
>> >> > this is where ambisonics should, theoretically, have an advantage.
>> >> >
>> >> > <
>> >>
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>> >> >
>> >> > Virus-free.
>> >> > www.avast.com
>> >> > <
>> >>
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>> >> >
>> >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 at 16:32, Fons Adriaensen <f...@linuxaudio.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 12:36:38PM +0100, jack reynolds wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > The only problem with using ambisonics mics is the high frequency
>> >> limit
>> >> >> > above which they stop working properly. A second order ambi mic
>> >> reduces
>> >> >> > this problem, but above about 7Khz the not quite coincident
>> capsules
>> >> >> > becomes a problem.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> First order responses from an OctoMic are near perfect up to 11 kHz
>> or
>> >> so,
>> >> >> and not perfect but still very usable even at 15 kHz. I doubt very
>> much
>> >> >> if there is any 'real' cardioid' doing better at that frequency and
>> >> above.
>> >> >> Certainly not if you take diffraction / reflection from the mic
>> body and
>> >> >> clamp into account.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Anyway, have you ever considered the sort of frequency and polar
>> >> response
>> >> >> you get by combining signals from capsules spaced more than 10 cm
>> apart
>> >> ?
>> >> >> You'll find they look quite horrible if you care to compute or
>> measure
>> >> >> them.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You could of course object that those should never be combined, just
>> >> each
>> >> >> one sent to its own speaker. But that would mean that such a one to
>> one
>> >> >> mapping is the only possible way to use such signals if you want to
>> >> >> preserve
>> >> >> sound quality. No downmixing or anything similar (e.g. binaural)
>> >> allowed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But we all know that this is not true, we all have heard very nice
>> music
>> >> >> recordings done with spaced mics. Even those in theory horrible
>> >> frequency
>> >> >> or polar responses resulting from spaced mics can sound quite well.
>> Wich
>> >> >> in turn means that this whole 'imperfect polar responses' debate is
>> >> mostly
>> >> >> academic if not irrelevant.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ciao,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >> FA
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Sursound mailing list
>> >> >> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> >> >> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe
>> here,
>> >> >> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Artist website: www.augustineleudar.com
>> >> > Business website: www.magikdoor.net
>> >> > -------------- next part --------------
>> >> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> >> > URL:
>> >> > <
>> >>
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20201023/17717069/attachment.htm
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Sursound mailing list
>> >> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> >> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe
>> >> > here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> >> ----- Fim da mensagem de Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
>> >> -----
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Sursound mailing list
>> >> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> >> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe
>> here,
>> >> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Artist website: www.augustineleudar.com
>> > Business website: www.magikdoor.net
>> > -------------- next part --------------
>> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> > URL:
>> > <
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20201023/c1b3c891/attachment.htm
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Sursound mailing list
>> > Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> > https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe
>> > here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> ----- Fim da mensagem de Augustine Leudar <augustineleu...@gmail.com>
>> -----
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
>> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>>
>
>
> --
> Artist website: www.augustineleudar.com
> Business website: www.magikdoor.net
>
>
>

-- 
Artist website: www.augustineleudar.com
Business website: www.magikdoor.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20201025/2abd8c5b/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Reply via email to