I think perhaps Stefan there is a language barrier or problem with communication here ?
Your exact words were ""*It is important to see that every position is panned to 2 speakers in * *2D, and (usually) 3 speakers in 3D.*" You didn't refer to mono - but I did refer to "one" channel being spread over several speakers sounding crap (or blurring spatialisation) to which you replied this was wrong because its how millions of records were made - - of course I believe you know what were stereo is and were referring to panning one sound source (eg a trumpet) across two speakers as in stereophonic panning - "one soundsource" being different to "one channel" - thus the confusion? Yes I know what VBAP is - I literally said it uses triangles in my last post and that I've used it for 15 years, VBAP is great - I do mix it with ambisonics sometimes though. As for upmixing stereo to 5.1 - I agree with you about leaving the front left and right intact if you *HAVE* to do it - all I was saying is upmixing stereo to 5.1 is never going to be as good as actually having a 5.1 mix to start with all six discrete channels created from the beginning uising a surround sound panner .(yes I know about the LFE). By the way - you work for Steinbergs marketing department right? If you are the same Stefan - will you PLEASE try and get them to incorporate some kind of DBAP (Distance Based Amplitude Panning) or similar into Nuendo? Basically, it would be great if you could draw speaker maps/position the speakers in the panner by dragging and dropping them to different positions (so then you could use really irregular arrays). For example, if I wanted to pan sounds corridors in a labyrinth or maze (which I have done before), or have a circle within a circle etc etc this would be a great feature and would definitely give it an edge over competitors like reaper. Ive been told you can do this in Pyramix but never seen it - but I have to do it in Max MSP at the moment or use Nuendos panners in ways they werent meant to be used. It would also be handy to adjust the directivity of soundsources. On Sun, 25 Oct 2020 at 11:53, Stefan Schreiber <st...@mail.telepac.pt> wrote: > > > > > > > > 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 > > So I tried to accurately describe how panning is done... đ > > Stefan > > > > > > 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: *âone channel over several speakers sounds crapâ* > >> " > >> 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 canât 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 canât 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 donât see any problem.) > >>> > >>> âone channel over several speakers sounds crapâ > >>> > >>> We are following normal panning rules, which are proven in millions of > >>> recordings. So I would say your statement is just wrong. > >>> > >>> You donât spread â8 speakers over 20 speakersâ in some statistical > >>> ways, if that is what you meant. > >>> So I just have suggested to âtryâ 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> > > ... > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20201025/83a343a0/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.
