naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: surround comment

Subject: Re: surround comment
From: "Rich Peet" <>
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:50:10 -0000
I understood that sacd was out of the question for a private
recordist.  I thought we were restricted to dolby tech. for the
little guy?

Rich Peet

--- In  "Greg Weddig" <>
wrote:
> I have a short response to that, DVD-Audio format or SACD.
> Multichannel formats that can reproduce high resolution multichannel
> sound, with or without lossless compression.
> The encoding software is rather expensive and the hardware is
slightly
> esoteric at the moment but with more DVD players supporting
> multiformat discs, I think this will change and prices will drop.
>
> --greg
>
>
> --- In  "Rich Peet" <>
> wrote:
> > Well, ya, the big guy is severly low-passed in mp3.  But this
bird is
> > like that.  Check out the side by side of the wave vs the mp3
that I
> > mixed within one wave file.
> >
> > 350 kb download at:
> > http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/GHO.wav
> >
> > My feelings on Surround should have been based as a question.
> > This stuff is so mixed with sales hype that to figure out how to
work
> > with it is really hard.
> >
> > I got into trouble reading at:
> >
http://www.dolby.com/professional/Support/tech.overview.html#DolbyDigi
> > tal
> >
> > It appears that you can not have 4 channels of 10khz range birds
> > singing at the same time and cover them with full bit depth. That
was
> > the sparrow comment. The thunder comment is probably workable
with
> > hours of post.  When a signal uses both the areas above and below
the
> > lfe channel the sums and sides appear to be very hard to work
with.=20
> > Maybe it can be done with a lot of work.  It appears that the
rear
> > surround channels were put there for sound reinforcement and not
to
> > be used as full distinct channels.
> >
> > I will continue to educate myself and work in full 4 channel but
> > geeze Dan do you have a magic decoder ring that can tell us if
this
> > tech will work for us if we want full four channel with high bit
> > depth?
> >
> > Rich Peet
> >
> > --- In  Dan Dugan <>
wrote:
> > > Rich Peet, you wrote:
> > >
> > > >Now with GHOW's you can get by with a tiny mp3 file because of
> > those
> > > >nice low notes.
> > > >
> > > ><20 kb download
> > > >http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/GHO1.mp3
> > >
> > > Yeah, but it sounds low-passed...
> > >
> > > >But if my reading is right you can not even put a sparrow or
> > thunder
> > > >on the surround channels of dolby 5.1.  Looks like home
theator
> > will
> > > >not be our future format.
> > >
> > > Please explain.
> > >
> > > -Dan Dugan



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU