On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 03:59:26PM +0200, Jan Jacob Hofmann wrote: > if a decode of 3rd *and* 7th order information - yielding in one > encoded file - would be mathematically correct if it comes to the > decoding of the higher order content. Would there be missing > something (maybe an overall lower amplitude of the third order > content)?
Assuming the decoder handles the 7th order correctly, it would not be 'mathematically correct' for the the 3rd order part, but I doubt very much if would matter at all. The errors would be much bigger if you would combine e.g. 3rd order with 1st order reverb. Assuming you use dual band decoding, then the low-frequency part (with systematic decoding) would actually be correct. For the high frequency part (where you'd have max-Re or in-phase decoding) you could pre-compensate the 3rd order part so it renders 'mathematically correct' with a 7th order decoder. But I don't think it matters much with these orders. Another thing to consider is why you'd use 7th order - youd need at least 64 speakers to actually decode it without throwing away some of the information. And it the final rendering is binaural, then an object-based format would be more efficient unless you have more than 64 objects. 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.
