Barry Hufker wrote on Tue, 05 October 2010 10:13 |
Without knowing more it seems he is using "holography". By that I mean he is putting left channel audio in the right-hand speaker (and vice-versa) to cancel out any speaker bleed between ears. It's an old technique that he has either revived or improved... And it would only work well in that one listening position. |
Barry Hufker wrote on Tue, 05 October 2010 15:33 |
"I think there's a lot more going on with what he's doing than that." Can you elaborate? Barry |
ssltech wrote on Tue, 05 October 2010 20:05 |
I used HRTF's all the time on the Studer D950S and vista consoles, but -and this is important- he's just starting with 2-channel stereo, and delivering to a 2-channel receiving device (the human head). That means that the only 'processing' info from which anything can be derived is from comparison between the two channels. HRTF in multitrack mix applications is one thing (and a thing of beauty, at that) but not really applicable to or in any way flexible for stereo-source-only, other than accommodating (extremely fixed) room circumstance. -Since he's obviously gone to great lengths to control the room acoustics (not feasible in real life) and the listener's position (again, not typically feasible unless you're something like an F-16 pilot) then I agree that this is all wankery. I also agree that the reporter didn't sound able to think their way through what they were reporting on. This IS transaural processing, it IS a parlour trick, and it's not very useful in the real world. Also, let's not overlook that since different techniques are used to assemble stereo recordings, (spaced-pair, coincident mic placement, Pan-pot-multichannel, etc) then the inter-channel differences (timing dominant in spaced pair, amplitude-exclusive in coincident and panpot recordings) dictate that there is NO way to generate reliable "3D" from stereo. No more than you can generate reliable stereo from mono. Nor -incidentally- is this Three dimensions. -This is a peeve of mine, sorry in advance for the rant. A theoretical 'point' has no dimensions. A 'line' has one dimension. A 'Square' has two dimensions, and a 'cube' has three. Similarly, Mono is non-dimensional because it resembles a point.. Stereo is actually ONE dimensional, because it resembles a line, where sounds can be placed along a single dimensional range between the two speakers. Quad/surround is TWO dimensional, because there is an added axis of control, as illustrated by the 'square' panning grid which you often see manufacturers use. "Three-Dee" requires an additional VERTICAL component for spatial 3D. I really wish people would use the terminology correctly. Only things like Periphonic (a type of Ambisonic playback) and true Imax (where the sixth full-range channel is the 'voice-of-god' overhead speaker) can really be called "three-dimensional". Anything else is marketing hyperbole, and utterly inaccurate. deriving a stable, position-and-reflection-tolerant controllable delivery from two speakers is bovine excrement. Nothing else. BOSE advertise 'surround from two speakers'. That's a similarly fertilizer-laden claim. You CAN perform some parlour tricks with two-channel stereo source, and DSP can be used to 'steer' between channels... But then delivering through two speakers re-limits what you can do, and if you split it through MORE channels, -while you overcome some of the delivery/reception difficulties- you cannot be assured that your decoding is accurate, because of the randomized possible stereo picture assembly techniques. -What of the Decca Tree now? Keith |
ssltech wrote on Tue, 05 October 2010 12:39 |
...those of us who don't mind being held in a straitjacket in the center of a padded room. |
jimlongo wrote on Wed, 06 October 2010 20:56 |
Co-incidently, Ihad an interesting visit this morning from a French company, Longcat, that is demoing a new 3D audio programming environment for use in your favourite DAW. It allows you to design a 3d space visually (consisting of size, wall materials, openings, etc., ), insert your source audio within the environment(s) you've created - and then move about within the audio spaces you've created. It utilizes a plug-in on each track you want to effect, as well as a stand-alone application where you design the space and moves. Very interesting for film . . . demo plug-in will be available soon . . . |
Longcat Audio wrote on Sat, 11 December 2010 08:23 |
Thanks Jim! We're happy to announce AudioStage LITE edition, a free limited stereo version of our full-fledged AudioStage. AudioStage LITE is freely downloadable on our website. Best, -Benjamin |
Les Ismore wrote on Sun, 12 December 2010 00:16 |
Lite no worky.... osx 10.6.2 logic, protools etc. program won't run. too bad looks interesting. |
maxim wrote on Wed, 15 December 2010 22:00 |
to be honest, i prefer subject-based art practice the suspension of disbelief is hard enough to maintain, and trompe l'oeils and parlour tricks, usually, only highlight that lack of objectivity |
maxim wrote |
".... used to belong to my wife and I." ahem..... (noone can escape the grammar police) |
Longcat Audio wrote |
The subject being one of the objects... |
ssltech wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:43 |
I object; -that's highly subjective. It's objectionably less subject to objectivity, but that's a different subject. Sorry if anyone objects to being subject to being the object of my subjectivity, but it's better than being subject to my objectivity. |
ssltech wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 09:43 | ||
I object; -that's highly subjective. It's objectionably less subject to objectivity, but that's a different subject. Sorry if anyone objects to being subject to being the object of my subjectivity, but it's better than being subject to my objectivity. |
Longcat Audio wrote on Thu, 16 December 2010 08:38 | ||
The subject being one of the objects, a visual representation of the whole scene shouldn't be a problem... ...unless you're versed into complete audio subjectivism, and denounce any possibility of true-knowledge in that field? Moreover, object-based mixing is not about tricks and trompe l'oeils, but more about having a tool to help the artist-engineer visually construct the scene. This is what you already do with a mixing desk, yet a bit less visually. Binaural-transaural rendering is an option then, not a prerequisite. Anyway, you're right: presenting some mixed sound to an audience is an artistic act, and should stay as it stands, whatever tools you use : a window to one's mind, a subjective point of view. --Benjamin |
Bill Mueller wrote on Sat, 18 December 2010 18:29 |
Banjamin, Can you attach your objects to 3D graphic objects in a game engine? |
Quote: |
(Sorry Keith, in game design I don't have another term because even though we are viewing on a flat screen, we do build our worlds in in-game 3D space.) |
Quote: |
I suggest the "object oriented audio programming" unless supported by "the object" (as in a video game or movie), in the listeners experience will detract from the final result by tricking the creator to accept something less than if he did not have the object oriented tool in the first place. This is the exact same thing as when you hear us old farts telling the young studs to not look at their Pro Tools monitor when mixing. Use your ears! |
Longcat Audio wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 15:31 |
Anyway, if you are in some sound design work for 3D animation movies, AudioStage can import 3D trajectories from Maya or 3DS max and use them while building up your project, instead of making endless adjustments to panning automation. |
mcsnare wrote |
He told me it basically makes speakers sound like you're listening to headphones. |
ssltech wrote on Sun, 26 December 2010 00:26 | ||
My instinctive reply is: Poppycock. Unless you can 100% eliminate acoustic crosstalk, this is -and shall ever remain- impossible. It may well be 'different' and suggest an experience reminiscent of wearing headphones, as listening to an ordinary stereo system under anechoic conditions can do, for example. |
Jon Hodgson wrote on Sat, 01 January 2011 06:08 |
Crosstalk cancellation is a fundamental part of 3d audio systems on speakers, perfect it isn't, but it is effective, certainly in the gaming environment. |
syntheticwave wrote on Wed, 02 February 2011 19:26 | ||
...but unfortunately, crosstalk cancellation cannot produce the elevation level, which should be essential, if we calling about 3D audio. |
Longcat Audio wrote on Sun, 19 December 2010 09:31 |
One of our goals was to be able to mix different panning techniques into one single mix (eg stereo+transaural+ambisonics+surround amplitude panning+...), along with serious acoustics modeling. The dreaded object approach was almost inevitable... |