On Thursday, July 22, 2010 01:07:57 pm
fons(a)kokkinizita.net did opine:
  On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:35:15AM -0400, Paul
Davis wrote:
  On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 10:29 AM, Chris Cannam
 <cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com> wrote:
  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? 
 my limited understanding  is this: the B-format data encodes the
 source position relative to some defined point in space. the decoder
 can map the "origin" used to define the positional space however it
 wants to. whether or not any decoders actually offer any control over
 this is another matter. 
 The first order B-format consists of four signals:
 W:      equivalent to an 'omni' microphone,
 X,Y,Z:  equivalent to figure-of-eight microphones
         pointing forward/back, left/right, and up/
         down respectively. 
 And interesting scenario, Fons.  But it leads this simple minded broadcast
 engineer with 45 years experience to ask a question.
 1. How are the signals brought into phase such that electronically, all mic
 ribbons or diaphragms seem to occupy the same space, just facing in
 different directions?
 If this is not addressed, then this will lead to some interesting comb
 filter effects if the signals are not kept from mixing, which they will of
 course do in the ear.
 Granted, the PV of sound in normal air would require separations of inches
 till the stuff above high C comes into play, but at the snares and cymbals
 frequencies, I would have to assume some coloration of the sound from this
 effect alone.  And of course the same concern comes into play at the
 speakers since they are generally placed around the listener which in no
 way approximates the nearly single point reception these mics will hear.
 In my own mind, the placement of a PZ microphone in each of the places one
 would place the playback speakers would seem to be a superior method, at
 least for a listener sitting in the nominal center, who will be so
 overwhelmed by (supposedly not important sonically we are told) the phasing
 errors that he cannot single out a single largest cause for the lack of
 realism.
 In my history of electronic repairs for a living over the last 60+ years,
 one instance of truly hair raising realism took place when I was about 21,
 and working one of the service benches at Woodburn Sound in Iowa City IA,
 USA.  I had bought some car parts at noon, and when I left about 6 for
 dinner, I forgot & left them on the corner of the bench.  Having a key to
 the back door I let myself into the back door about 8, which was pretty
 dark by then as only one 25 watt bulb out in the display area was on, and
 half way to the door to my bench area & right in the door to the front,
 display room, the Dukes of Dixieland marched by, going right over me.  It
 seems that Woody and Saul Marantz were out in front, had pulled a 2nd JBL
 Hartzfield speaker out of Saul's econoline van, setting it just inside the
 front door opposite to ours in the other front corner of the display floor,
 along with a Berlant/Concertone tape deck capable of running at 15 and 30
 IPS.  And the tape was the master that had cut the Dukes then current hit
 record, running at 30 ips.  SNR was a good 70+ db, and there was no tape
 hiss audible unless you walked directly in front of the JBL 075 ring
 radiator tweeters that had been added to both our Hartzfield and to the one
 Saul was carrying around.  No tone controls, and only a 30 watt Marantz
 stereo amp., those Hartzfields were then, and may be yet, the most efficient
 speakers ever made, never used more than 3 or 4 watts/channel to get SPL's
 that would have done Joshua's trumpets at Jericho proud.
 Truly a total immersion in the sound, from about 35hz to nearly 30khz.
 Those tweeters could do a fairly good job of reproducing a 25khz square
 wave.
 It took till I had been introduced to Saul Marantz and shook hands, and for
 that tape (on 14" NAB reels) to run out before the hair on the back of my
 neck was truly relaxed.  Saul it turned out was an endless source of
 technical knowledge sprinkled with BTDT stories.  And needless to say, I
 did not manage to get that hydromatic transmission I had just stick shifted
 back together till a day later.  Yeah, I'm a JOAT. :)
  
As an ape (of course I'm an ape like every human is an ape) and troll (I
don't see myself as a troll) I suspect phasing too, that's why I
overstated argued with the next generation Cochlea-Implant, or needles
in the brain.
Visual 3D, by a surround projection + 3D glasses isn't perfect, but
there is just one picture and not several pictures that needs to be
phase synced in the eye. Perhaps a week analogy.
When having 4 or 8 or more speakers I fear phasing at the position of
the ears. But perhaps it isn't that much. I'll try to listen to
ambisoncs :).
The 5.1 I know sounds bad.
Cheers!
Ralf