On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 09:12:54AM -0400, Marc Lavallée wrote: > Your document mentions that the results for the EM and the ZM-1 are based on > a numerical simulation; can you (briefly) elaborate?
There is an analytical solution (involving spherical Bessel and Hankel functions) for diffraction by a solid sphere, so it is possible to compute the response of each of the capsules for a plane wave arriving from a given direction. This provides the same info as an impulse response measurement, just assuming a perfect sphere and capsules. So any calibration procedure based on impulse response measurements (i.e. finding a convolution matrix that transforms the set of capsule signals into polar patterns corresponding to spherical harmonics) can be done as well using such 'simulated measurements'. > What is the criteria to define a "usable polar pattern" (to determine a > highest frequency)? That is a fuzzy definition of course. I'd say a signal is 'usable' if, when combined with others in a beamformer or AMB decoder, it can produce something close to the required result. 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.
