This was going to be one of my questions to Smyth - whether their filter format was documented.
Does the Realiser deliver as advertised in your opinion?
Yes, absolutely on my list of extensions once the basic idea is validated. I already have an implementation of the Gerzon/Trifield approach done, and it would be the basis for the next step. I think it will be interesting to see how the inclusion/exclusion of xtalk in the side channels impacts the overall presentation - I'm not sure 'phantom' imaging between C/R for example will work correctly if all xtalk has been removed from the R response - I think it will have to be included but I guess that's part of the experiment.
Additional channels for height and/or ambiance could also follow as appropriate, although I'm not entirely sure how to derive height cues.
Yes.
What's your impression of trifield? Does it add any spaciousness, making single images wider and taller or is it "just" a more defined and solid stage or something else?
Not a bad idea
Hehe... done in days ago:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...oustanding-stereo-imaging-25.html#post2885089
That's easily missed. (and only ScottG gave me a smile
)Of course there're some major differences between Watson and my setup. But the principle of enhancement in ITD is in common, I believe.
It may not be theoretically (or pollitically) correct, but compared with my previous 3-panel (3-channel) in optimal linear matrix and the following SSS (in single panel), this setup is indeed better in many ways, especially in imaging of course.
(The 2nd best is, except for the cheap pine boards for the baffles, I didn't buy anything new, all spares.
)Hehe... done in days ago:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...oustanding-stereo-imaging-25.html#post2885089
That's easily missed. (and only ScottG gave me a smile
I should note that derivations on the "Watson" theme have been done many times before.. usually with limited commercial success. Dynavector superstereo is the one that immediately comes to mind.
The basic idea relates to a wider angle loudspeaker placement with respect to lower freq.s. vs. what occurs naturally with head-shading and higher freq.s.. i.e. *lower* correlation at freq.s below 1 kHz.
A better method would be just dispensing with those freq.s below head shading from their normal "frontal" placement (i.e. the Orion midrange and bass section in a Watson added configuration), and instead using only the effects channels as shown in Watson. Upper freq.s should be from a loudspeaker placement that are closer together (approaching 0 degree for the listener - i.e. straight in front) or synthetic mono as seen in this thread. I think the real question is just how high in freq. they should go? Based on the amount of separation between the loudspeakers, the closer they are the higher in freq. they can go without the need for blocking the spl-gradient toward the listener.
The basic idea relates to a wider angle loudspeaker placement with respect to lower freq.s. vs. what occurs naturally with head-shading and higher freq.s.. i.e. *lower* correlation at freq.s below 1 kHz.
A better method would be just dispensing with those freq.s below head shading from their normal "frontal" placement (i.e. the Orion midrange and bass section in a Watson added configuration), and instead using only the effects channels as shown in Watson. Upper freq.s should be from a loudspeaker placement that are closer together (approaching 0 degree for the listener - i.e. straight in front) or synthetic mono as seen in this thread. I think the real question is just how high in freq. they should go? Based on the amount of separation between the loudspeakers, the closer they are the higher in freq. they can go without the need for blocking the spl-gradient toward the listener.
Last edited:
clever guy, this is my basic TV sound setup too
when TV is off I use it for background music in my living room too, and then, funny, people keep asking and asking where are the speakers?
Last edited:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/121385-loudspeakers-room-system.html anyone?
I find it absurd, actually, that people let themselves to be submitted to the authority of a stereo triangle, like they would have no will of they own
exactly
Last edited:
Hehe... done in days ago:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...oustanding-stereo-imaging-25.html#post2885089
That's easily missed. (and only ScottG gave me a smile
Of course there're some major differences between Watson and my setup. But the principle of enhancement in ITD is in common, I believe.
It may not be theoretically (or pollitically) correct, but compared with my previous 3-panel (3-channel) in optimal linear matrix and the following SSS (in single panel), this setup is indeed better in many ways, especially in imaging of course.
(The 2nd best is, except for the cheap pine boards for the baffles, I didn't buy anything new, all spares.
Not missed
But it's more of a distributed system than a pure SSS You got all the essential elements for a good sound in your system: SSS panel with 0.5 matrix, slot loaded dipole bass, dipole midrange and flooded tweeters.
- Elias
Trendy SSS !
With Fostex elements, looks like:
Miniature:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
With Fostex elements, looks like:
Miniature:
How many ?
Is there an upper limit. Gerzon stated 400000 speakers is enough for full frequency range 3D wave field synthesis I'm not kidding.5.1 Home theater system with golf ball sized speakers
This is how the industry wants us to listen to music (and movies). Although, even they have recognised that generally people are not willing to install multiple of speakers in their living spaces. Thus they have to make them disappear..
I think the SSS makes the necessary disappearing act but still having the attribute of being tastefully designed
- Elias
How many ?
This is how the industry wants us to listen to music (and movies). Although, even they have recognised that generally people are not willing to install multiple of speakers in their living spaces. Thus they have to make them disappear..
I think the SSS makes the necessary disappearing act but still having the attribute of being tastefully designed
- Elias
I think heights and wides in the front and the back are enough to generate realistic sounding spaciousness and envelopment for sound sources on a horizontal plane.
I would be the first to throw out my multiple speakers if a single speaker could produce the spatial qualities I'm looking for. It's not just some evil plot of "the industry", it's simply a necessity if one wants the widest possible range of auditory spaces that are controlled by the recording itself.
This is interesting concept and cool name: Acoustic planetarium
Look, it's SSS Speaker designed to operate with room reflections.
Reality Media Lab.
"We research about the completely new sound providing method "acoustic planetarium. "This method is by placing enclosure which is installed several parametric loudspeakers in the middle of the room, these speakers emit the sound like a planetarium projector and we can experiment auditory MR on anywhere.
Parametric loudspeaker which we use have highly directional. This enables us making 3D sound field by emitting sound anywhere and reflecting or spreading it with wall or reflecting object. By this way, several people can share the sound field without mounting headphone, unlike the traditional system.
We define the MR system with acoustic planetarium and the MR world as "X-Media Galaxy," and aim to realize the 3D space with high presence which people have never experienced so far."
Look, it's SSS
Speaker designed to operate with room reflections.An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
.jpg){kind=link}
Reality Media Lab.
"We research about the completely new sound providing method "acoustic planetarium. "This method is by placing enclosure which is installed several parametric loudspeakers in the middle of the room, these speakers emit the sound like a planetarium projector and we can experiment auditory MR on anywhere.
Parametric loudspeaker which we use have highly directional. This enables us making 3D sound field by emitting sound anywhere and reflecting or spreading it with wall or reflecting object. By this way, several people can share the sound field without mounting headphone, unlike the traditional system.
We define the MR system with acoustic planetarium and the MR world as "X-Media Galaxy," and aim to realize the 3D space with high presence which people have never experienced so far."
Ultimate system for a horizontal plane:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Ideal for a small room, like in the pic LOL
8 speakers ? Sounds like Ambisonics with height, the periphony
If tiny sweet spot is not a problem, then adding more speakers may be allowed. However, the sweet spot gets smaller with increased number of speakers.
5.1 having smaller sweet spot than 2 channel stereo ! (Of course the marketing material tells otherwise, how else they could sell plurality of speakers to fill the poor consumer's living spaces..)
Interchannel Interference at the Listening Position in a Five-channel Loudspeaker Configuration
http://www.tonmeister.ca/research/pubs/martin02a.pdf
"It is commonly-accepted thinking that the use of a
five-channel surround sound reproduction system
increases the size of the listening area over that
for two-channel stereophonic systems. In actual
fact, for many types of program material, the area
of this so-called “sweet spot” is reduced due to
interference between the channels at the listener’s
ears. This effect is described and analysed through
theoretical evaluation and psychoacoustic listening
tests."
- Elias
Last edited:
8 speakers ? Sounds like Ambisonics with height, the periphony
Or even more than 8. Depends how much one is willing to do. Forget about Ambisonics, recording techniques are not going to change. What might change is how sound is stored. We need to get rid of systems with a fixed number of channels. And some work is done in that direction. With such a new approach the user can choose the playback system that suits him best.
It's a fact that the sweetspot is small and all recorded music is really just made for a single seat. Doesn't matter if stereo or multichannel. A center channel helps. By the way, a single stereo speaker works by the same principle. The only difference is that there are no real side speakers but wall reflections.