Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: My thoughts on Immersive Audio, based on first-hand listening

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default My thoughts on Immersive Audio, based on first-hand listening

    Take a look. Blog post from 5.22.15

    http://3daudioinc.com/wp/
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  2. #2
    Wireline's Avatar
    Wireline is offline 3D VIP 2004, '05, '06, '08, '09, '10
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Midland Tx
    Posts
    11,363

    Default

    Niiiiice! So many questions arise from this though. Is this the place for them?
    Ken Morgan
    2010 3d VIP

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Fort Wayne, IN, USA
    Posts
    27,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Wireline View Post
    Niiiiice! So many questions arise from this though. Is this the place for them?
    Sure. Shoot.
    Lynn Fuston
    3D Audio

    Making beautiful music SEEM easy since 1979.

  4. #4
    Wireline's Avatar
    Wireline is offline 3D VIP 2004, '05, '06, '08, '09, '10
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Midland Tx
    Posts
    11,363

    Default

    Presuming one would would use an omni for the ceiling mic?

    How will this translate from Lord knows how many source tracks to a pair of earbuds? Just an oddity of observation, but the 3 dimensional aspect is what I fear has disappeared from hyper-designed control rooms and listening areas! Consider: Regardless of technology, we still are limited to two ears, and the ability of those ears to process and correctly place in the X, Y, and Z axes whatever stimulates them. When listening in environments that remove the Z axis, limit the Y, and artificially enhance the X, is yet another level of electronics really necessary, or just listening in a room with naturally placed (as opposed to strategically placed) speakers really the best solution? In a relatively spartan room, sound reproduced with enough energy will bounce off the ceiling, walls, etc, just as it does when it the sound is 1st generated, giving the true spacial 3D (!) presence.

    Please note I'm just asking!


    That said, it appears, after giving this matter quite a bit of thought, is there any validity to the idea that sound capture ideally would be from the listener's natural perception (impossible at the moment from a mix and production standpoint, I know) instead of adding yet another level of processing? I get it, that a tremendous part of the 'stereo' effect would be lost, but it would add a great deal of vertical reality if done in a large enough room AND THE LISTENER CHOSE SOMETHING OTHER THAT EARBUDS.

    Perhaps loudspeaker designers could assist with this as well?

    Truly fascinating article/writing (well done, BTW)...
    Ken Morgan
    2010 3d VIP

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    NashVegas
    Posts
    1,714

    Default

    Way back in the '60s, Acoustic Research used to do demos where the audience would listen to either solo acoustic guitar or small chamber group perform, on a stage which included a pair of AR-3 loudspeakers. They (the audience) would be asked to try to tell if the sound was emanating from the group, or speakers.

    "During the early 1960s, Acoustic Research, Inc conducted more than 75 live-vs.-recorded concerts around the country (Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington and other cities) featuring The Fine Arts Quartet and unequalized, commercial AR-3 loudspeakers. Additional concerts were subsequently performed with guitarist Gustavo Lopéz, and also live-vs.-recorded demonstrations were done with a 1910 Seaburg Nickelodeon during one of the New York High Fidelity Music Shows. Over time, the AR-3/Fine Arts Quartet concerts were attended by over 15,000 music lovers, music critics, audio- magazine editors, newspaper editors and the like, and the overall impression was that the "switchovers" between live and recorded music were nearly always indistinguishable, a testament to the rigorous method of recording in anechoic space to avoid double reverberation, the scourge of live-vs.-recorded concerts. Recordings were done outdoors to avoid unwanted reflections." The entire thread is here: http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=82842.0

    I will reiterate that this was two large "bookshelf" speakers in decent environments... still my choice for HiFi listening enjoyment. Well... that and acceptable playback sources...

    Movie soundtracks and games...? That's different. But I'd wager that, like any other gimmick based on an "effect"... I'd likely tire of it, as I did of 5.1. My AR9s, purchased in 1979 and refoamed in 1998 or so...? Still loving them, and using them daily.

    HB
    Last edited by hbphotoav; 05-25-2015 at 04:54 AM.
    Harry Butler Photography, Videography and AV Production
    www.harrybutlerphotoav.com

    "I'm CDO. That's like OCD, but the letters are in alphabetical order. As they should be." Seen on a T-Shirt.

  6. #6
    Scott Fraser is offline Gold Club Member (1000+ posts)
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,347

    Default

    Where were the overhead speakers placed? Straight overhead pointing down, or out at a 45 degree angle above the horizon aiming in, or something in between?
    SF

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    365

    Default

    I spent a lot of time attending Atmos and Auro3D (as well as conventional 5.1 surround) demos at the CEDIA Expo last fall, and I came away with a number of impressions. The two most germane were probably

    - the audible differences between any given manufacturers' specific executions/implementations were far greater than the audible differences between Atmos and Auro3D as an approach. iow, the "margin of error" between how Company A set up their demo room versus how Company B set up their demo room was far greater than any overt signature that could be ascribed to differences between the two immersion technologies.

    - More importantly: Really good 5.1 still sounded more engaging, more dynamic, more captivating, more musical, and (ironically) more immersive than all but the very best Atmos or Auro3D. We're already seeing tons of Consumer-Immersion-On-The-Cheap products for the home theater: Modestly priced surround receivers with additional output channels, "Atmos-enabled" speakers that have a few additional drivers pointed at the ceiling (in lieu of separate dedicated height channel speakers), etc. In most instances these systems will not achieve the suspension of disbelief that these technologies were designed to elicit.

Similar Threads

  1. XP SP3 and AMD-based PCs
    By Andreas Lassak in forum Asides (a parenthetical departure; a digression)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-11-2008, 03:00 PM
  2. Thoughts On Audio
    By Tim Julian in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-26-2008, 06:06 PM
  3. Sennheiser Web Based RFI Database
    By DonM in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-28-2007, 04:42 PM
  4. Audio Technica listening sessions
    By Revelation in forum Microphones and Preamps
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-20-2006, 07:34 PM
  5. Listening in the morning vs. listening at night?
    By Greenhorn in forum The Old Yellow Board
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-19-2006, 02:33 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •