Yeah, that picture. It's my experience that any deviation from equal spaced speakers creates distortions. The speakers should work together as a coherent team. It's also my thought that anything below quad is pretty inaccurate do to the influence of the playback room.
Well the one I use is in VST form now. So it's basically compatible with any samplerate (44.1-192) and bitdepth (8,16,24,32float,32-fixed,64-bit float). Not exactly ready to give out any copies though. The decoder is done but the plan involves me finishing some other related projects as well before I am going to release it. I don't think I am going to just give it away either but my thoughts are that it should be easily accessible and cheap.
Last edited:
I don't have access to a Mac. I can hack one of my computers to run OSX or whatever but it is wholly unsupported and probably illegal. I am willing to try out any decoder against mine. Most decoders will get you very close and it's pretty much my opinion that all of them are trying to do the same thing even if they don't know it. But I have been through the circle of confusion and back a few times and I am pretty sure most people who will attempt what I have will end up in that circle. But I have given a few ingredients to get out I guess. Nothing new though - it's the same basic layout Pierre Schaeffer used in the first surround sound system I know of existing.
BTW,
here is the patent for the decoder:
espacenet — Bibliographic data
There is also an article in a magazine. Probably you have an abo, Dr. Geddes.
Recording and play-back two-channel system for providing a holophonic reproducti
I haven't read yet, but probably it only describes the system for their proprietary recordings, not the use with standard sound files.
here is the patent for the decoder:
espacenet — Bibliographic data
There is also an article in a magazine. Probably you have an abo, Dr. Geddes.
Recording and play-back two-channel system for providing a holophonic reproducti
I haven't read yet, but probably it only describes the system for their proprietary recordings, not the use with standard sound files.
Last edited:
I just took an old ghettoblaster with removeable speakers and built a 4 x 90° quadro-setup together with the Carlssons. Then I played my Xenacis CD that was recorded according to the Anrea von Salis method (Both front and rear speakers got the same signal!) I sat in the middle of the percussion group! It was absolutely clear which instrument was in front and which was in the rear. Nothing that reminds of some dirty psychoacoustic trick. A must-hear! I think the sound files at the Andrea von Salis website are also stereo recordings done with this method. Who the .... needs multi-channel?
from my perspective there is one principal problem with those interesting concepts, the same problem as with ambiophonics
they seem to offer various alternatives of the audiophile chamber, that is an exclusively dedicated listening room for ultimate satisfaction of single listener or perhaps a couple, seated in a very precise spot
something that reminds me of Woody Allen "Sleeper"'s orgasmatron
though orgasmatron was much more practical
is this hexaphonic less impractical than ambiophonics? what are its sonic advantages in comparison to ambiophonics?
best,
graaf
ps.
BTW has anyone got a chance to listen to Dynavector Superstereo?
http://web.onetel.com/~dynavector/
I haven't but I always had sympathy for the idea, at least it was not computer audio and they recommended using speakers with beautiful Bandor drivers
Last edited:
I don't usually read any of the popular press. I actually have had subscriptions, just to see what was vogue this month, but I never took anything that I read in them serious.
well, "The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America" is certainly not popular press
it is peer-reviewed, prestigious and as scientific as possible:
That's what the Realiser allows you to do. You make a virtual copy of the multi-million dollar room acoustics and take it home.
Hello,
I've been listening for a few hours with the 2-way monopole in ceiling firing arrangement. The box is placed beside a wall on the floor and I'm listening at 2 to 5 meters distance.
Again this was a MONO setup with one speaker.
I tested the setup by listening Bach organ works and Bach motets.
Some observations:
* a little bit surprisingly I cannot localise the speaker at the floor, it never happened.
* the sound is coming a bit far away, from 'somewhere'.
* it sounds like I'm beeing constantly off axis because the tonal balance is different when placed at the floor beside the wall, so I had to use EQ to correct that.
* there is no sweet spot in the room. If I stay more than 2 meters from the speaker the sound is the same everywhere.
* turning my head has no effect on the sound, nice. This is better than stereo in this regard
I can even face backwards without a change in sound.
* some small detail in the recording is lost This is noticeably with the complex polyphonic choral music. It is hard to follow the threads with ease and there is a thick layer of sound instead. I don't like this because it's an obvious lack. I have a fetish on small detail
* I don't see a future with this kind of speaker with ceiling firing on the floor placement. However, a Pluto kind of speaker might be better though.
So far my conclusion is that my dipole line arrays give me more what I want
- Elias
I've been listening for a few hours with the 2-way monopole in ceiling firing arrangement. The box is placed beside a wall on the floor and I'm listening at 2 to 5 meters distance.
Again this was a MONO setup with one speaker.
I tested the setup by listening Bach organ works and Bach motets.
Some observations:
* a little bit surprisingly I cannot localise the speaker at the floor, it never happened.
* the sound is coming a bit far away, from 'somewhere'.
* it sounds like I'm beeing constantly off axis because the tonal balance is different when placed at the floor beside the wall, so I had to use EQ to correct that.
* there is no sweet spot in the room. If I stay more than 2 meters from the speaker the sound is the same everywhere.
* turning my head has no effect on the sound, nice. This is better than stereo in this regard
I can even face backwards without a change in sound.* some small detail in the recording is lost
This is noticeably with the complex polyphonic choral music. It is hard to follow the threads with ease and there is a thick layer of sound instead. I don't like this because it's an obvious lack. I have a fetish on small detail * I don't see a future with this kind of speaker with ceiling firing on the floor placement. However, a Pluto kind of speaker might be better though.
So far my conclusion is that my dipole line arrays give me more what I want
- Elias
I have one (1) monopole box borrowed from my friend at house and I'm thinking to try ceiling firing arrangement with that. It's a 12litres bookshelf speaker with 6.5" midrange and a dome tweeter. I understand that the dome radiation may be too wide for floor placement, but I can also use acoustic absorption panels to block the direct sound if needed.
Would you advice the best arrangement for a such a test? I'll place the speaker on the floor facing upwards. Along the side or front wall? Or a distance from a wall?
Note again it will be a MONO
- Elias