[LAD] Attenuation of sounds in 3D space

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 07/24/2010 10:45 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 10:02 -0700, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
>> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 08:51 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 01:09 +0200, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
>>>
>>>> one thing that often gets overlooked: people have learned to accept
>>>> stereo (or, in some circles, 5.1) as the gold standard, and its
>>>> shortcomings have grown into desired features. it's very hard to compete
>>>> with a method that does a few things very well and doesn't even try to
>>>> reproduce most of the auditory cues of, say, a live experience.
>>>
>>> Correct, I like stereo, I don't like 5.1 and indeed stereo is very
>>> limited, but with some training it's good to handle.
>>> If ambisonics shouldn't have the disadvantages of 5.1 I might like it.
>>
>> One crucial difference, please:
>>
>> Ambisonics is a spatialization technique.
<...>
>> So, comparing Ambisonics and 5.1 is comparing apples with airplanes
>> (oranges would be too close, they are both fruits). Very different
>> things.
>
> That gives me hope that I'm wrong about abilities of surround sound :).
> If I'm mistaken, it will be a win for me :).

i'm soo happy that you benefit from this list. however, it would be very 
much appreciated if you wasted less of everyone else's INBOX space in 
the process.

at the risk of stating the obvious:
think first, then hit "send". your frequent followups to your own mails 
within a minute and the many non-sequiturs when you hijack other 
people's threads indicate that this concept might be new to you, which 
is why i mention it.
not that i'm not myself guilty of this once in a while (most everybody 
is, sometimes), but your posting track record stands out by an order of 
magnitude.

it is also considered socially more acceptable to initiate a learning 
process by asking carefully phrased questions, not by posting totally 
ignorant hypotheses that lack even the tiniest bit of factual support, 
and then caving in when people express their utter bewilderment and 
going all humble and oh how i want to broaden my horizon... that is 
funny once, but gets old pretty quick.

also, please fix your mailer settings to not cc: people personally, you 
can assume that everybody is reading the list mails.

i for one would really like to see fewer ralf mardorf mails in my inbox, 
and i have an inkling that many people share this sentiment. that 
doesn't mean you shouldn't join or start any discussion you like, but 
please pretty please stop wasting everybody's time and condense your 
thoughts.


no offense, only impact intended,


jörn