Hi David,
I still don't quite understand. Let's say I have a recording of a bird tha=
t flies in one side and out the other, and I can track the sound of wings i=
n a continuous path from one side to the other, how can I measure that in u=
nits of "sonel?"
John Hartog
rockscallop.org
--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
>
> > How are your "sonels" measured? Is this a method of breaking up the
> > image into discrete sections? I usually think of stereo image in
> > terms such as polar pattern, vertical and horizontal and depth
> > compressions, and rear to front folding. How would "sonels" be
> > divided in such a scheme?
>
> John,
>
> As stereo is an illusion, you are judging the quality of that
> illusion - by ear. With a stereo image you should be able to resolve
> that into distinct sound elements as with a group of individual birds
> or with a moving object.
>
> If you can point to individual sources in that image, a sonel count
> gives you a measure of how well you can resolve that image, as with
> pixels in a light image. If you can resolve different object sources
> vertically, then you can give a vertical sonel count as well. With
> depth, you are pushing the concept too far, as with an optical 3-D
> image which stops at a 2-D pixel count.
>
> As I said in my original explanation, a 3 sonel image is stereo but
> poor, and a 9 sonel image is good going. With a "walkaround" test, you
> can also see how even the stereo image is, and if the perceived sonels
> are stretched or compressed, sonels give you a measure of that. If you
> are using phase effects to get sound objects outside the loudspeaker
> width, then that's extra sonels.
>
> David
>
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>
|