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.

Reply via email to