Huge speaker fakes the record room acousticsn

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Hi,
on the www.holophony.net website is simply described a grazy procedure:

The “Holophony”- solution based on a large-scale frontal WFS Loudspeaker screen, magenta drawn in the animation. Such arrangement can work truly in all three room dimensions. Over and above inside the near field of such huge resulting diaphragm the playback room acoustics become subordinate matter. Its reflections no longer must eliminate by strongly damping, but include purposefully in the synthesis. The loudspeaker screen aligns the direct wave and its first reflexions in the playback room for fake the recording room reflections in time, level and direction. They arrive, particularly reflected from the playback room walls, by the listener’s ears in the same manner as by the ears of a virtual listener in the recording room.

It is comparable the sound projectors, but doesn`t fake the loudspeakers, but the source itself. What are you think about the procedure?
 
If I read this correctly, the intention is to "fake" the exact acoustic signature that would be heard by "a virtual listener in the recording room" regardless of the playback room's acoustics?



1)the very pretty graphics on the linked site and veracity of the technology aside, it still sounds like more multi-channel voodoo to me, and more importantly

2)exactly why would "faking" the recording room be desirable?

Perhaps it should say "virtual listener in the virtual space " intended by the mixing engineers


In how many of modern day recordings are many of the "instruments" virtual - as in never present in any physical space, and among those real instruments/artists, how often are they all in the same acoustic space and time?

I'm sure that more than a few recording & mixing engineers would describe the tremendous efforts undertaken to overcome the acoustic deficiencies of the frequently quite disparate spaces in which the original sounds are collected, before the real "black magic" of synthesis occurs.
 
It is comparable the sound projectors, but doesn`t fake the loudspeakers, but the source itself. What are you think about the procedure?
This is the best mono system I see on plans. Personally I could prefer a NXT speaker as TV screen and speaker, as is know the NXT is the own screen. Cause a NXT panel is bipolar(there is no 5dB of loss as dipole) and is onmidirectional like this system you show.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_mode_loudspeaker and http://www.vxm.com/NXT.html
Regards
 
Last edited:
If I read this correctly, the intention is to "fake" the exact acoustic signature that would be heard by "a virtual listener in the recording room" regardless of the playback room's acoustics?


1)the very pretty graphics on the linked site and veracity of the technology aside, it still sounds like more multi-channel voodoo to me, and more importantly

2)exactly why would "faking" the recording room be desirable?

Perhaps it should say "virtual listener in the virtual space " intended by the mixing engineers


In how many of modern day recordings are many of the "instruments" virtual - as in never present in any physical space, and among those real instruments/artists, how often are they all in the same acoustic space and time?

Hello Chris,

Of course today productions mostly are art- objects, the instruments during recording never seen real room acoustics.

But the traditionally procedures causing a lot of contradictorily cues, because the wave fronts doesn’t arrive from directions, comparably the natural spatial distribution in a real recording room. Our head and pinna filter system produce very strong level changes in the frequency response of each single wave front, if its direction differs from the desired direction. That’s important especially for the first reflections. The cues of ILD particularly misguiding during conventionally audio reproduction, especially if the playback room produce own wave fronts from wrong directions.

You shouldn’t see the described procedure as a tool for produce a copy of a genuine sound event, but as tool for produce more natural audio art; a more nature like synthesis. :)


H.
 
:confused:What the eff would you need such a system for? OK, if you have the LPs Pioneer made in the 70s, with orchestra pieces recorded with but one pair of stereo mikes...but then you´d have to get your living room´s acoustics out of the equation, ie use headphones and store the superspeakers in the garage.
 
This is the best mono system I see on plans. Personally I could prefer a NXT speaker as TV screen and speaker, as is know the NXT is the own screen. Cause a NXT panel is bipolar(there is no 5dB of loss as dipole) and is onmidirectional like this system you show. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_mode_loudspeaker and http://www.vxm.com/NXT.html Regards

Hi FullRangeMan,

the distributed mode loudspeakers would work perfect for the application, but there are some further possibilities. Because of the perfect load adaption of the resulting diaphragm we need only very small excursions. For 100 inch diameter resulting diaphragm would cheap solutions as the Warwick Audio foil nearly sufficient.

But also the German Fraunhofer institute works on WFS flat loudspeaker solutions as described in the Scientificblog. The future is possibly not bright, but really loud by such developments.:)

Regards H.
 
"Fakes the record room"

Which record room? The vocal booth in L.A. or the concrete bunker they recorded the drums in in New York?

Most recording "rooms" come out of a reverb device, or a plugin in your favourite recording software.

This would be more interesting if the music was mixed on this system. Then the rooms (mixing and reproducing) might dissapear and you'll hear exactly what the mixer/producer heard. Which IMO is what we should be striving for.
 
"Fakes the record room" Which record room? The vocal booth in L.A. or the concrete bunker they recorded the drums in in New York? Most recording "rooms" come out of a reverb device, or a plugin in your favourite recording software.

That isn’t the solution, but the problem. If we merge together the source signal and all reflections in some channels, we can radiate all wave fronts only from common, mostly wrong, directions.
On the other hand convolution isn’t a problem today, if you transmit the dry recorded signal, we can convolve it on the playback side for reverberation. But we have the source signal for produce the first reflections from the model of the desired recording room. So we can fake its reflections correctly. The transmitting standard would be MPEG4, the principle is Wave field synthesis.

Regards H.
 
I disagree syntheticwave because there is more to it than just 2 independent tracks in a stereo signal. Also I can't blame generated ambiance as being bad because I have heard some sloppy wet recordings done with mics as well as impulse based reverbs. I dunno if I exactly see an advantage to giving the person who plays back the tracks control over the reverb when on most recordings I hear the reflections are omnipresent while the sources are discrete in the signals already.
 
I disagree syntheticwave because there is more to it than just 2 independent tracks in a stereo signal. Also I can't blame generated ambiance as being bad because I have heard some sloppy wet recordings done with mics as well as impulse based reverbs. I dunno if I exactly see an advantage to giving the person who plays back the tracks control over the reverb when on most recordings I hear the reflections are omnipresent while the sources are discrete in the signals already.


… also wrong keys particularry.:)

I agree the reverberation is omnipresent, its spatial distribution hardly important for the detection of the source position. But the first reflections, that’s another case. Its time and direction are the most important cue for our perception of a sound event. We cannot simply merge it in two common channels. The difference in angle regarding the source position is the base of the acoustic “Attractions” in the genuine sound field.

The goal of the Holophony principle isn’t giving the control to the listener; the goal is avoid misguiding cues, caused by first reflections on wrong times from wrong directions.


Regards Helmut
 
This is the best mono system I see on plans.
Regards


Hi, Full Range Man,

at first, congratulations for the olympic games in brazil.

But the system isnt really mono, at least not more mono as any arbitary real source. The systen restore the spatial sound field in the same manner as the recording room builds up the spatial sound field.

Regards H.
www.holophony.net
 
Hi, Full Range Man,
at first, congratulations for the olympic games in brazil.
But the system isnt really mono, at least not more mono as any arbitary real source. The systen restore the spatial sound field in the same manner as the recording room builds up the spatial sound field.
Regards H.
www.holophony.net
Thanks for the compliment friend. Being sincere, I must told to you as a audiophile since 14 years old I have no interest at all in games (only F1, F Indy etc), but this is good for the country anyway.
A big county is made with engineers and workers, the lawyers and athletes are dispensable, they do not build anything, just play with a ball and the lawyers as everyone knows are plagues of insects.
Regards, Gustavo
 
For really real. I can't learn a language in a class it just doesn't work for me if I have no one to talk to.

sorry for the delayed reply to these totally off-topic post exchanges, but my earlier jibe was to the assertion "in America, since everyone speaks English"


I'd wager that's there's a substantial population (citizens or not, and not including tourists) that don't, even as a second language. That's certainly the case in many parts of Canada - Hongcouver and Surrey to name just a couple.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.