searc for SDM-N50 schematics on google and the first one is a free russian site.
Attached the relevant part. Marked the legs with green dots which might need attention:
DSEL - to set the digital input format. You gave to lift leg12 and ground it for connecting to the pana. leave 13 and 14. DSEL2 selects the digital input mode, DSEL0 and 1 the format.
DIN - input data from the panasonic
DOUT - output data to the pana - needs one BCLK delay
BCLK - tied together with EXTAL: SCLK from the pana
SYNCN - LRCK from the pana, needs deley, I'll check it later
CTSEL - don't lift it, just ground it
BSFT - necessary bitshift depends on the angle you select with CSEL. For experiments lift it and put it on 2 switches to be able to select 0V and 5V individually.
RESET - you can leave it, or tie it to the pana reset
CSEL - to set the dipole angle. They are on a pull up resistor, so just connect the proper leg to GND for configuring.
EXTAL - lift the leg and connect to the SCLK from the pana
XTAL - lift the leg, and leave empty
Attached the relevant part. Marked the legs with green dots which might need attention:
DSEL - to set the digital input format. You gave to lift leg12 and ground it for connecting to the pana. leave 13 and 14. DSEL2 selects the digital input mode, DSEL0 and 1 the format.
DIN - input data from the panasonic
DOUT - output data to the pana - needs one BCLK delay
BCLK - tied together with EXTAL: SCLK from the pana
SYNCN - LRCK from the pana, needs deley, I'll check it later
CTSEL - don't lift it, just ground it
BSFT - necessary bitshift depends on the angle you select with CSEL. For experiments lift it and put it on 2 switches to be able to select 0V and 5V individually.
RESET - you can leave it, or tie it to the pana reset
CSEL - to set the dipole angle. They are on a pull up resistor, so just connect the proper leg to GND for configuring.
EXTAL - lift the leg and connect to the SCLK from the pana
XTAL - lift the leg, and leave empty
Attachments
We may not despair yet! An affordable tact ambiophonic module is in the works. Here is from a letter by Ralph Glasgal that I found on the net:
Here is some info about Tact using ambiophonics. Since you are Orchestra lover, I thought you may find ambiophonics interesting!
"I agree if by Ambi you mean Ambiophonics. Ambiophonics is an equal
opportunity angular reproducer.
First, I want to reiterate that the Ambiophonic Institute is a non-
profit
research charity that does research on its own and also supports and
coordinates the efforts of others, mostly volunteers, to the tune,
so far,
of some $2 million. In the Christmas spirit, Ambiophonics is the
greatest
story never told. But that is about to change.
Although all our results and software are available free on the web,
it is
desirable that Ambiophonics be commercially available as well. I am
thus
pleased to announce that TacT Audio is the first high-end
manufacturer to
embrace Ambiophonics with unbridled enthusiasm.
If you already own an RCS 2.2-XP you can down load the RACE
(Recursive
Ambiophonic, Crosstalk Eliminator) into it from the TacT website for
free.
It is also a free option in new units. Already the Ambiophonic 2.0,
a
similar unit at a much lower price, is in the works. RACE will also
soon
find its way into the TacT amplifier, internet, and home theater
products.
Eventually, the three basic elements of Ambiophonics, crosstalk
cancellation, hall IR surround ambience generation, and speaker
correction,
will finally be commercially available in one box.
The first ad will appear in the English magazine Hi-Fi News/RR and
TacT
will be at CES (Venetian) and the Home Theater Show (Hyatt) in New
York in
May if all goes well.
On Richard's point above, using two TACT RCS-2.2-XPs with RACE
driving
front and rear speaker pairs (Ambiodipoles), I routinely get solid
natural
sounding imaging at or around the 90 degree points. The Dr.
Chesky's Show
DVD-A is a good one to prove this is easily possible as are any of
the four
channel surround recordings made by Robin Miller using the
Ambiophone. The
Pierre Verany, test CD Nightingales track is also hard to resist.
But it is also possible with just a frontal Ambiodipole and one RACE
to
image at the very far sides using just the front channels of the
above
discs or with many other standard classical or pop discs. Consider
the
Waterlily Mahler 5th. The orchestral stage is not more than some
central
90 degrees wide but at the end, when the applause comes on, WOW it
goes
right out to the extreme 180 degree width. The SF Mahler 3rd is
exceptionally wide throughout. Actually is it fun to see which
seemingly
ordinary CDs or LPs do have ITD or ILD equivalent to far side
psychoacoustic values. One Vanguard SQ sampler LP from 1973 "Tico
Tico
Toc", played without decoding, is a way-out example.
Finally, the TacT version of RACE contains ten variations on the
RACE theme
(5 with logic feedback and five without) plus two adjustments (delay,
attenuation) common to all ten. Basically, if you are truly golden
eared,
you can adjust the stage width, and tailor the Ambiodipole sound to a
particular recording. One or two of the modes are useful for
correctly
handling ( ie not accidentally cancelling non-existent crosstalk)
almost
mono recordings such as those of a soloist and guitar both recorded
only
with mono spot mics.
There is also a remote control button to switch instantaneously
between
RACE and straight through stereo. So far, with normal RACE settings
there
is no audible change in timbre or level when the control is
activated but
of course the stage collapses. Incidentally, if you listen to mono
over
two speakers, you will find RACE/Ambiodipole a great improvement.
But
anyway, you should always be listening to mono with just one speaker
at
center front to avoid comb filtering, bogus ITD/ILD, and pinna error.
Really finally. I have sent out some precancelled demo discs of
earlier
non-Tact RACE programs of varying quality. But now, If you want to
hear
what your own pet CD can sound like Ambiophonically, send it to me
and I
will code it onto a CD-R for you or tell you that it is 90% mono.
Ralph Glasgal
4 Piermont Road
Rockleigh, New Jersey, 07647
www.ambiophonics.org"
Here is some info about Tact using ambiophonics. Since you are Orchestra lover, I thought you may find ambiophonics interesting!
"I agree if by Ambi you mean Ambiophonics. Ambiophonics is an equal
opportunity angular reproducer.
First, I want to reiterate that the Ambiophonic Institute is a non-
profit
research charity that does research on its own and also supports and
coordinates the efforts of others, mostly volunteers, to the tune,
so far,
of some $2 million. In the Christmas spirit, Ambiophonics is the
greatest
story never told. But that is about to change.
Although all our results and software are available free on the web,
it is
desirable that Ambiophonics be commercially available as well. I am
thus
pleased to announce that TacT Audio is the first high-end
manufacturer to
embrace Ambiophonics with unbridled enthusiasm.
If you already own an RCS 2.2-XP you can down load the RACE
(Recursive
Ambiophonic, Crosstalk Eliminator) into it from the TacT website for
free.
It is also a free option in new units. Already the Ambiophonic 2.0,
a
similar unit at a much lower price, is in the works. RACE will also
soon
find its way into the TacT amplifier, internet, and home theater
products.
Eventually, the three basic elements of Ambiophonics, crosstalk
cancellation, hall IR surround ambience generation, and speaker
correction,
will finally be commercially available in one box.
The first ad will appear in the English magazine Hi-Fi News/RR and
TacT
will be at CES (Venetian) and the Home Theater Show (Hyatt) in New
York in
May if all goes well.
On Richard's point above, using two TACT RCS-2.2-XPs with RACE
driving
front and rear speaker pairs (Ambiodipoles), I routinely get solid
natural
sounding imaging at or around the 90 degree points. The Dr.
Chesky's Show
DVD-A is a good one to prove this is easily possible as are any of
the four
channel surround recordings made by Robin Miller using the
Ambiophone. The
Pierre Verany, test CD Nightingales track is also hard to resist.
But it is also possible with just a frontal Ambiodipole and one RACE
to
image at the very far sides using just the front channels of the
above
discs or with many other standard classical or pop discs. Consider
the
Waterlily Mahler 5th. The orchestral stage is not more than some
central
90 degrees wide but at the end, when the applause comes on, WOW it
goes
right out to the extreme 180 degree width. The SF Mahler 3rd is
exceptionally wide throughout. Actually is it fun to see which
seemingly
ordinary CDs or LPs do have ITD or ILD equivalent to far side
psychoacoustic values. One Vanguard SQ sampler LP from 1973 "Tico
Tico
Toc", played without decoding, is a way-out example.
Finally, the TacT version of RACE contains ten variations on the
RACE theme
(5 with logic feedback and five without) plus two adjustments (delay,
attenuation) common to all ten. Basically, if you are truly golden
eared,
you can adjust the stage width, and tailor the Ambiodipole sound to a
particular recording. One or two of the modes are useful for
correctly
handling ( ie not accidentally cancelling non-existent crosstalk)
almost
mono recordings such as those of a soloist and guitar both recorded
only
with mono spot mics.
There is also a remote control button to switch instantaneously
between
RACE and straight through stereo. So far, with normal RACE settings
there
is no audible change in timbre or level when the control is
activated but
of course the stage collapses. Incidentally, if you listen to mono
over
two speakers, you will find RACE/Ambiodipole a great improvement.
But
anyway, you should always be listening to mono with just one speaker
at
center front to avoid comb filtering, bogus ITD/ILD, and pinna error.
Really finally. I have sent out some precancelled demo discs of
earlier
non-Tact RACE programs of varying quality. But now, If you want to
hear
what your own pet CD can sound like Ambiophonically, send it to me
and I
will code it onto a CD-R for you or tell you that it is 90% mono.
Ralph Glasgal
4 Piermont Road
Rockleigh, New Jersey, 07647
www.ambiophonics.org"
I am currently using a Carver C-9 for inter aural cross talk cancellation along with the Yamaha DSP-100U (sans rear channels till next week--I hope) I am very pleased with the results and am eager to add more channels.
Can anyone do a compare and contrast between the C-9 (or the Hughes AK-100, etc, etc) and ambiophonics?
Has anyone used a PC to do the dsp work for ambiophonics?
Edit:
Yes they have LOL
http://www.ambiophonics.org/Ambiofiles.htm
Can anyone do a compare and contrast between the C-9 (or the Hughes AK-100, etc, etc) and ambiophonics?
Has anyone used a PC to do the dsp work for ambiophonics?
Edit:
Yes they have LOL
http://www.ambiophonics.org/Ambiofiles.htm
eStatic said:
Yes: RACE in the 2x2 convolver in Foobar2000.
Works reasonably well, but there is a mild (reflective) asymmetry in my room that tends to make the image a little lop-sided when the "stereo dipole" is adjusted to be absolutely spot on. This is ameliorated by a tiny amount of side/rear difference signal with the appropriate filtering and delay (done using the crossover component in Foobar2000), but that aspect is still in the experimental stage for me.
Whether it really works well depends on the microphone technique used in the recording (some can be wonderful, some really not very convincing).
Incidentally: the solution to finding a really low noise PC was putting a noisy one in the crawl-space under the floor. The rest of the PC cost no more than the sound interface (Echo Gina 3G, whose cable allows it to be above floor level).
I had a go at making my own impulses (simulation), but so far have not hit on anything that is obviously much better than Glasgal's examples provide.
At a minimum it is great fun!
Ken
thanks Shin for posting the deqx message, wasn't sure whether to put it in here. If someone wanted the deqx and wanted to upgrade, but missed out on this time limited offer it would be rather dissappointing no??
Hi fcserei
If I remember correctly, it was you that started the Ambiophonics thread somewhere here?? Also I don't recall a lot of people with experience with it.
Anyway (are we going off topic here??...let me know if I'm doing that) the HW you refer to, not sure what you meant but I took it as something like Hard Wall (??) meaning the solid physical barrier ?? If so then I'm confused by the need for the JVC ambience boxes as I thought the wall did that.
I should/(probably will) retry the barrier method (last time the results were decidedly underwhelming), if that don't sound good then no point in going further.
If it is a way to pursue, then it would have to be a pc based solution, as who in their right mind would sit with a honking big 'mattress' in front of their nose?? ha ha
Re 'disadvantages of a pc', I presume you simply mean factors like noise etc etc. From the Ambiophonics website you can download tracks that have had the crosstalk removed from them...so why could you not simply use the pc to apply the algorithms and then burn to cd and play the treated track as normal??
(I think I will find the old ambiophonics thread and cut this into it, to stop this thread going in the wrong direction)
fcserei said:
I have 2 ambio setups, one HW with XTC DSP and JVC XP-A1010 ambience boxes, one with PC and multichannel sound card.
What can I say, the HW solution is more convenient and foolproof, the PC is more flexible to try out things, but has all the disadvantages of a PC
Hi fcserei
If I remember correctly, it was you that started the Ambiophonics thread somewhere here?? Also I don't recall a lot of people with experience with it.
Anyway (are we going off topic here??...let me know if I'm doing that) the HW you refer to, not sure what you meant but I took it as something like Hard Wall (??) meaning the solid physical barrier ?? If so then I'm confused by the need for the JVC ambience boxes as I thought the wall did that.
I should/(probably will) retry the barrier method (last time the results were decidedly underwhelming), if that don't sound good then no point in going further.
If it is a way to pursue, then it would have to be a pc based solution, as who in their right mind would sit with a honking big 'mattress' in front of their nose?? ha ha
Re 'disadvantages of a pc', I presume you simply mean factors like noise etc etc. From the Ambiophonics website you can download tracks that have had the crosstalk removed from them...so why could you not simply use the pc to apply the algorithms and then burn to cd and play the treated track as normal??
(I think I will find the old ambiophonics thread and cut this into it, to stop this thread going in the wrong direction)
I mean I have DSP ( a physical box) to do crosstalk cancellation. I don't use barrier. Also have several JVC processors to generate the extra ambient channels.
I also have a PC where I generate the crosstalk cancellation with convolution and the ambient channels with convolution reverbs.
The disadvantages are like the noise, complexity, the software conflict, the lack of key software sometimes ( anybody can suggest an ac3 decoder VST plugin?
), usability etc. In case of config changes what is one remote button press for the HW setup is at least a couple minutes in front of the monitor of the PC if everything goes well and still works.
But of course it is much easier to "rewire" on the PC screen than heating up the soldering iron.
I also have a PC where I generate the crosstalk cancellation with convolution and the ambient channels with convolution reverbs.
The disadvantages are like the noise, complexity, the software conflict, the lack of key software sometimes ( anybody can suggest an ac3 decoder VST plugin?
), usability etc. In case of config changes what is one remote button press for the HW setup is at least a couple minutes in front of the monitor of the PC if everything goes well and still works.But of course it is much easier to "rewire" on the PC screen than heating up the soldering iron.
I've been experimenting with the ambiophonics plugins and a little with the ambiosonics stuff as well. One more thing I want to try is VBAP or Vector Based Amplitude Panning which if my understanding is correct, it is a variation on ambiosonics. If anyone has a source for a VST for VBAP I'd appreciate a link. Right now I think it can only be done in MAX/MSP.
Without reading this whole thread, there are a couple of ambiosonic VST plugins @ http://www.gerzonic.net/ in case it hasn't been posted yet. I think the swiss and york plugins were posted already IIRC.
The ambiophonics is probably the easiest to use and after listening to it, I can't even stand to listen to a normal stereo setup anymore.
There are a few ways to do it.
1) The Farina X-Volver works in Console and you can use the IMP from the ambiophonics webpage. What I have noticed is that even if you save the config file in Console, you need to reload the IMP file each time. The way around this is to hibernate rather than full startup/shutdown. If you have problems with ASIO hibernating, I came across a program that allows you to load and unload programs during hibernation sequences. I have not tested the hibernating yet though. I'd have to find the link again for the hibernation program.
2) If you go to Angelo Farina's page or it might have been on the ambiophonics page, Farina was originally using Voxengo Pristine Space for the crosstalk cancelation convolution before he came up with his X-volver plugin.
3) doom9.org forums has a couple ambiophonics VST's in the audio editing forum. User Daphy just recently uploaded the plugins to an FTP again so get them while they are still available. One of them creates the ambiophonic experience in 5.1. I'm only testing on two speakers right now, but it sounds a little different than Method A/B on the ambiophonics page.
4) Audiomulch works the same way as Console and you can have more control over Method A (RACE). I think you can control it via MIDI, but again I haven't tested it and don't know much about MIDI control.
Another good resource to look up other alternatives besides doom9.org is www.dtsac3.com. They have all sorts of other conversion methods working with Plogue Bidule.
I've been trying to get people to try ambiophonics recently, and so far most people are pretty impressed, but are turned off by the fact you have to use a computer. I don't see the problem. Nothing else is this flexible.
I have no noise issues and I'm using an Audiotrak Prodigy Hifi card with upgraded opamps. I've even used an Audigy2 card with good results, but I prefer the Audiotrak.
Without reading this whole thread, there are a couple of ambiosonic VST plugins @ http://www.gerzonic.net/ in case it hasn't been posted yet. I think the swiss and york plugins were posted already IIRC.
The ambiophonics is probably the easiest to use and after listening to it, I can't even stand to listen to a normal stereo setup anymore.
There are a few ways to do it.
1) The Farina X-Volver works in Console and you can use the IMP from the ambiophonics webpage. What I have noticed is that even if you save the config file in Console, you need to reload the IMP file each time. The way around this is to hibernate rather than full startup/shutdown. If you have problems with ASIO hibernating, I came across a program that allows you to load and unload programs during hibernation sequences. I have not tested the hibernating yet though. I'd have to find the link again for the hibernation program.
2) If you go to Angelo Farina's page or it might have been on the ambiophonics page, Farina was originally using Voxengo Pristine Space for the crosstalk cancelation convolution before he came up with his X-volver plugin.
3) doom9.org forums has a couple ambiophonics VST's in the audio editing forum. User Daphy just recently uploaded the plugins to an FTP again so get them while they are still available. One of them creates the ambiophonic experience in 5.1. I'm only testing on two speakers right now, but it sounds a little different than Method A/B on the ambiophonics page.
4) Audiomulch works the same way as Console and you can have more control over Method A (RACE). I think you can control it via MIDI, but again I haven't tested it and don't know much about MIDI control.
Another good resource to look up other alternatives besides doom9.org is www.dtsac3.com. They have all sorts of other conversion methods working with Plogue Bidule.
I've been trying to get people to try ambiophonics recently, and so far most people are pretty impressed, but are turned off by the fact you have to use a computer. I don't see the problem. Nothing else is this flexible.
I have no noise issues and I'm using an Audiotrak Prodigy Hifi card with upgraded opamps. I've even used an Audigy2 card with good results, but I prefer the Audiotrak.
I have also dabbled with ambiophonics recently, and was very intrigued by what I heard. I wish it was a little more prominent so that there could be more discussion on it.
I have run both the Audiomulch RACE implementation (which runs well on Linux under Wine) and the Choueiri filters (as included in the jace convolver for linux). I spent more time with RACE and for the most part got better results, although on some recordings the effect was too much - instruments placed hard-left in the mix were distractingly too far out of the main stage. The Choueiri filters seemed to be more moderate in their effect which helped a bit, but also seemed to reduce the sense of space overall. I was a bit surprised by how well RACE worked given that it only uses pure delay on the xtalk channels - no frequency shaping at all.
All this was done with only my main speakers @ 20 degrees - no auxiliary or ambience channels. Unfortunately, the 20-degree placement really doesn't fit my current room, so I can't really leave it set up that way.
I did briefly try to combine DRC filters with the ambiophonic processing, and failed. Understanding what is going on with the ambio stuff, I suspect the problem is that you need extremely close alignment/matching of the two channels, and I didn't ensure that my DRC filters were exactly impulse aligned.
What I think I'm really interested in this direction is the Optimal Source distribution approach (opsodis), but so far haven't found the time to start anything. I have the drivers to experiment, although I'm not sure I have 8 amp channels, an the time to setup/measure etc is probably not going to be trivial so it may stay on the back burner for a while.
I have run both the Audiomulch RACE implementation (which runs well on Linux under Wine) and the Choueiri filters (as included in the jace convolver for linux). I spent more time with RACE and for the most part got better results, although on some recordings the effect was too much - instruments placed hard-left in the mix were distractingly too far out of the main stage. The Choueiri filters seemed to be more moderate in their effect which helped a bit, but also seemed to reduce the sense of space overall. I was a bit surprised by how well RACE worked given that it only uses pure delay on the xtalk channels - no frequency shaping at all.
All this was done with only my main speakers @ 20 degrees - no auxiliary or ambience channels. Unfortunately, the 20-degree placement really doesn't fit my current room, so I can't really leave it set up that way.
I did briefly try to combine DRC filters with the ambiophonic processing, and failed. Understanding what is going on with the ambio stuff, I suspect the problem is that you need extremely close alignment/matching of the two channels, and I didn't ensure that my DRC filters were exactly impulse aligned.
What I think I'm really interested in this direction is the Optimal Source distribution approach (opsodis), but so far haven't found the time to start anything. I have the drivers to experiment, although I'm not sure I have 8 amp channels, an the time to setup/measure etc is probably not going to be trivial so it may stay on the back burner for a while.
Interesting this has been brought up.
I've been playing around with stereo expander plugins, reverbs, convolutions and ambiophonic for some time now. I've found the ambiophonic to offer the most pleasing and consistent effect, the others are rather haphazard and slightly crude.
The Ambio doesn't work for every recording but if the original venue was significantly larger than your listening space then it virtually always sounds more pleasing, particularly on any non electronic music. There's is a caveat, I can't stand having the ambio retrieval wet signal set just a few dB below the unaltered dry signal. It just sounds too OTT to be believable. Instead I prefer subtle settings such as 13-15dB below reference and attenuate the wet bass signal slightly more than the mid and high frequencies.
For me it widens the stage out and provides that sense of air and space very obviously missing from the recording but doesn't create a false or exaggerated experience like the recommended settings do. I should add that I have my speakers setup in a regular way so this has something to do with the changes I've mentioned.
I also have both DRC and ambio running. DRC already refines the imaging, tonality and sound stage, ambio then adds a more correct sense of spatiality. It does indeed sound very impressive if the recording quality is good and the venue of the original performance dictates that correct spatiality is impossible to recreate in your own listening room.
I should add that I prefer to turn it off for electronic music(dance etc.) and for small venue acoustic, vocal, jazz etc. because you get a more natural sound without it.
So in short its not universally applicable but when the blocks fall into place, nothing can touch it. I think fans orchestral music will find this an amazing experience.
I've been playing around with stereo expander plugins, reverbs, convolutions and ambiophonic for some time now. I've found the ambiophonic to offer the most pleasing and consistent effect, the others are rather haphazard and slightly crude.
The Ambio doesn't work for every recording but if the original venue was significantly larger than your listening space then it virtually always sounds more pleasing, particularly on any non electronic music. There's is a caveat, I can't stand having the ambio retrieval wet signal set just a few dB below the unaltered dry signal. It just sounds too OTT to be believable. Instead I prefer subtle settings such as 13-15dB below reference and attenuate the wet bass signal slightly more than the mid and high frequencies.
For me it widens the stage out and provides that sense of air and space very obviously missing from the recording but doesn't create a false or exaggerated experience like the recommended settings do. I should add that I have my speakers setup in a regular way so this has something to do with the changes I've mentioned.
I also have both DRC and ambio running. DRC already refines the imaging, tonality and sound stage, ambio then adds a more correct sense of spatiality. It does indeed sound very impressive if the recording quality is good and the venue of the original performance dictates that correct spatiality is impossible to recreate in your own listening room.
I should add that I prefer to turn it off for electronic music(dance etc.) and for small venue acoustic, vocal, jazz etc. because you get a more natural sound without it.
So in short its not universally applicable but when the blocks fall into place, nothing can touch it. I think fans orchestral music will find this an amazing experience.
eStatic said:
I'm no expert on such things but I heard it mentioned in another thread that there's colouration from the stereo effect. We've all got very used to this by now.
The person who talked of this colouration outlined a simple way to demonstrate his thoughts. You take three identical speakers, place them in front of you arranged at the usual left, center, right positions. Play a mono signal into the center and then compare the same mono signal sent to only the left and right. Without the stereo colouration the left and right should produce a phantom image close to the same sound as the single center. However they don't.
dwk123 said:
Here my opinion differs significantly from Mr Glasgal's: I feel necesstary to have inverse HRTF in the XTC filter, not only delay/filter if the recording is a plain stereo record. For me it makes the stage much more real, much more believable. It is like " I hear stage widening" v.s. "I cant belive that just those 2 speakers are making this" difference.
dwk123 said:
I did a 3 channel OPSODIS setup and calculated the filters with the AURORA. It is surely requires much less dynamic headroom for processing, but it is hard to make the apparent stage width to be the same for different freq bands. IMHO adding ambience channels is more important than opsodis if you have enough headroom in the stereo dipole and the listening room is not live. It is easier to have a proper stereo dipole XTC in the 200-10k band and have stereo woofers up to 200Hz to the sides, or have ambience with full range channels. They will provide the binaural bass just right.
I agree.
I'm actually pursuing this area as well except as a horizontal array. I'm all setup, but my test environment is a little different than most of you and I'm sure some of you may cringe if I told you.
Here's the only thing I have to go off of, but I haven't researched this area much. Alot of it is just my thought process going on inside my head and what I have learned working in a non-ideal environment.
http://www.isvr.soton.ac.uk/FDAG/VAP/html/osd.html
I thought the same thing but never tried to reduce the WET level. I'll have to try that. I was hoping there was a cross between RACE and Chourei, maybe that's the answer. WIth some recordings with alot of reverb it was almost frightening too much.
For me it widens the stage out and provides that sense of air and space very obviously missing from the recording but doesn't create a false or exaggerated experience like the recommended settings do. I should add that I have my speakers setup in a regular way so this has something to do with the changes I've mentioned.
You really need to set your speakers up right. Stereo needs a particular setup, this is no different even though it should be more forgiving. You need to think of ambiophonics in terms of a mono ambiophonic center channel of sorts.
You should try DRC after ambiophonic processing. If you mess with the timing prior it might not work so well. I have used time delay after the fact to see if it would correct for being off center and it worked great.
Electronic music is artificial anyway and who know what type of effects they applied or what it's really supposed to sound like. In that case I'll live with the whatever happens with it.
I'd love to hear this on a proper line array setup where you can overide the effects of the room a little better. I'd rather try line arrays coupled with waveguides over DRC right now.
Interesting info about ambiophonics, it was mentioned in an AES paper in 1960, but the processing power was not available then. Lucky us.
I think BruteFIR was even originally developed for ambiophonic purposes as well.
Should we move the discussion to the original ambiophonic thread? or is this realted to the original topic?
durwood said:
Reducing the wet level never worked for me.
The XTC gets "frightening" if lots of artifical reverb (or independedn reverb mic signal) added to the original recording. The echo tends to move to the sides and sound very unnatural. Again, having ambience can cure it very effectively.
I found bot the RACE and the Chourei less than ideal, the XTC not very effective and the side images are not too believable.
Don't forget, the ISVR samples have inverse HRTF processing, the RACE and Chourei does not. Just listen to the walkaround ISVR demo, can get very real.
durwood said:
I used to have 8' long , 6.5" wide acoustat panels with and without vaweguides for stereo dipole. Point sources and dead rooms work much-much better.
fcserei said:
I think that is where the second set of front speakers is supposed to help out. I haven't gone any further than 2 front speakers though.
They were recorded with a dummy head so that makes sense. Most of the music we are trying to convert was recored with any number of stereo micing techniques and I don't think an Inverse HRTF plugin would help but I could be wrong.
Is it possible that point sources work better because they are easy to locate where as electrostats tend to use reflections from the side walls? It's stated that you want a very dead room for it to work the best.
I noticed they had a couple different pictures of setups, 1) Electrostats, 2) Bose.
And then you do a little research, Bose is trying to do something similar but they call it something else-TRUESPACE
http://www.bose.com/controller?even...T&url=/popup/tech_details/pop_techmod_321.jsp
facserei: I need to resort to your expertise and guidance once more in order to get rid of my physical xtc barrier.
I finally took the plunge and bought (well, I´m currently bidding on one on ebay) a sony mediabox to use its yss901 as a crosstalk canceller.
I have been revisiting your past posts on this endeavour, and downloaded the sony mediabox circuit esquematics as well as a yss901 esquematic from yamaha.
I would like to use the digital input and output on the chip. The center channel mixdown issue is not a problem since I will use it only on cd´s, not multichannel material.
You described how to hook it up inside a panasonic receiver but, can it be used as an external box between the cd player and the yamaha ax1, I mean, without accesing the inside of the ax1?
If the answer is negative I could maybe try and hook it inside my jvc xpa, which I believe you have already done.
I finally took the plunge and bought (well, I´m currently bidding on one on ebay) a sony mediabox to use its yss901 as a crosstalk canceller.
I have been revisiting your past posts on this endeavour, and downloaded the sony mediabox circuit esquematics as well as a yss901 esquematic from yamaha.
I would like to use the digital input and output on the chip. The center channel mixdown issue is not a problem since I will use it only on cd´s, not multichannel material.
You described how to hook it up inside a panasonic receiver but, can it be used as an external box between the cd player and the yamaha ax1, I mean, without accesing the inside of the ax1?
If the answer is negative I could maybe try and hook it inside my jvc xpa, which I believe you have already done.
I know I'm way out of my depth when we start to talk about modifying pre-bought units to achieve the x-talk cancellation.
I MAY be able to work out all these plug-ins etc, with a lot of help from some mates.
So, on the website we can download some tracks that have already had the x-talk cancelled, and burn them to disc and presumably play them through the existing system, albeit with only the two front speakers (placed appropriately). This may not give the full surround experience but presumably should give a better stereo experience (well according to the literature).
So, if I worked out how to burn and copy my existing cd's with the x-talk cancelled, and played that thru my existing system ....is that a workable way to go? Must be getting close if such things are available on the website no?
That would remove the 'need' for a properly setup PC system, or the need for some of these extra crosstalk cancellation boxes, which seem rare and or need modification.
Is this a viable way forward? Also removes the mattress ha ha.
I MAY be able to work out all these plug-ins etc, with a lot of help from some mates.
So, on the website we can download some tracks that have already had the x-talk cancelled, and burn them to disc and presumably play them through the existing system, albeit with only the two front speakers (placed appropriately). This may not give the full surround experience but presumably should give a better stereo experience (well according to the literature).
So, if I worked out how to burn and copy my existing cd's with the x-talk cancelled, and played that thru my existing system ....is that a workable way to go? Must be getting close if such things are available on the website no?
That would remove the 'need' for a properly setup PC system, or the need for some of these extra crosstalk cancellation boxes, which seem rare and or need modification.
Is this a viable way forward? Also removes the mattress ha ha.