On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 09:54:25PM +0000, Thorsten Michels wrote: > My first idea was to use my native Ambix-B-format microphone setup. This > would give me the greatest flexibility, right?
Not really. Higher order AMB will give you much better results. There are not so many options. The following provides some info on how they compare: <http://kokkinizita.linuxaudio.org/ambisonics/hoamics.pdf> > But a few weeks ago I did a recording on a historical marketplace with it > and additionally with my "real-head-binaural" (Roland CS-10EM) in-ears > microphones. > > The blackbirds in the tree above I can very clearly and precisely localize > with the Rolands, but not with the AmbiX-B-format. What a disappointment! That is to be expected. But: - The real-head-binaural is optimised for *your* head and ears. It may not provide the same result for other listeners. - It's also not possible to render this with head tracking, and conversion to non-binaural formats may be problematic. To get really good results when converting to binaural you need higher order AMB. First order can be optimsied but even then it is really a very delicate compromise between conflicting requirements. > But what would you choose? And always be aware of this is a unique and real > "once-in-a-lifetime" chance!!!! I'd go for the Eigenmike or Core Sound's Octomic. And of course if you have some spare channels. add some classical stereo setups. It would also depend on what is the intended use of these recordings. Do quantum computers make any noise at all (except for the cryogenics etc.) ? 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.
