Hi Marinos,
"...
> a soundfield recording can be decoded for a full-sphere rig of say 16
> speakers resulting in a 3d immersive sound experience. While it is possible
> to do some alchemy and have a doubleMS recording played back accordingly, I
> doubt whether the result would be of equal interest (at least in terms of
> faithful localization)
>
> a doubleMS rig is in essence 2-dimensional while soundfield is a
> 3-dimensional mike
..."
I understand now how ambisonics could potentially create a more "immersive"
listening experience than other surround systems, but
I am still left to wonder how practical, over stereo, it has actually proved to
be for representing natural soundscapes.
In my experience, two channel stereo can represent a natural space with enough
localization to easily say it is fully three dimensional in that it does
provide the listener xyz to some extent.
If ambisonics has the potential to provide xyz to some greater extent than
stereo, that does not necessarily make a good stereo recording sound only two
dimensional in comparison.
John Hartog
rockscallop.org
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|