25 Jul
2010
25 Jul
'10
6:12 p.m.
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 18:03 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 17:40 +0200,
fons(a)kokkinizita.net wrote:
PS: Using the dummy head effects for headphones = left + right + ahead +
behind ... without headphones stereo is more limited ;).
I guess overhead and bottom is another very special issue.
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 05:21:17PM +0200, Jeremy
Jongepier wrote:
It was 2D Ambisonics actually, using 8 speakers. 3D (with height)
is yet another experience.
It doesn't matter. I was wrong about my general (mis)judgement about
surround. This doesn't mean that I'm fine with Ambisonics. I don't know
it until now, because I didn't tested it, but for sure I was mistaken,
because my experiences regarding to surround are outdated, resp.
Ambisonics itself is as old as I'm, but less known.
I try not to be more royalist than the king.
As I mentioned before, even for '2D' IMO = stereo, There are
some good mixes for stereo and mono, but at least I never
heard a valid mix with more but one ore two channels.
I've been to Jörn Nettingsmeier's workshop at LAC2010 and that was 3D
allright. And the good thing was, the complete recording and mixing was
done with Linux. I don't use the given
abilities, because I tend to do stereo mixes compatible to mono.
I'm not fine with 5.1 (or what ever the equivalent for movies is called)
when watching a Hollywood movies. Somebody did mention that it even
isn't 5.1 what I don't like, but the usage of 5.1.
IMO more enlightenment is needed.
I'm completely outdated, other people might confuse '3D' with '2D'.
IMO the current possibilities are less known.
;)
Ralf