28 Jul
2010
28 Jul
'10
9:46 p.m.
On 2010.07.22. 16:45, Arnold Krille wrote:
On Thursday 22 July 2010 16:29:01 Chris Cannam wrote:
I've been studying process of spatialization a bit, and ambisonics
figure in there quite a bit.
I was wondering if there is some "data loss" if I encode ambisonic
format and then decode it to whatever "direct channel-to-speaker" format
(stereo, 5.1, others) is needed, in stead of writing to different
channels directly.
To make it a bit clearer: What difference would these methods cause?
1. Inputs -> B-format -> 5.1
or
2. Inputs -> 5.1
Simply first method allows me to concentrate making ambisonics only, and
then use already existing decoders to create final output.
Question that just occurred to me. I'm very
ignorant about spatial
audio, and although I'm sure several of my colleagues could tell me
this, I thought it might be sort of on-topic here. Is it possible, or
easy, or sensible, or worthwhile, to reduce a B-format recording into
stereo in multiple different ways in order to achieve different
subjective "listener position" results when using headphones?
It makes sense to reduce B-format to stereo.
But the target is important, if you aim at headphones, there are decoders that
create an binaural signal. If normal stereo-systems are the target, you will
do a decoding similar to any ambisonics setup but only use two speakers in the
correct stereo positions and decode to file...
The headphone-version gives more of the ambisonics feeling, but the normal
stereo signal also benefits from the recording done in ambisonics.