On 07/31/2010 11:14 PM, "Bearcat M. Şandor" wrote:
> Thank you. I think i understand all that, but let me take this apart to
ah, no, sorry. as fons remarked earlier, that mail was kind of sloppy.
it's just that when you embark on the ambisonic trip, there are many
high-end stereo truisms you should be prepared to let go of.
worse yet, ambisonic systems have some clear disadvantages that would
not be accepted in high-end stereo circles - different localisation
ambiguities, sometimes coloration, sometimes extreme phasing, etc.
and there is no reason to accept them in stereo.
at the same time, there is no reason to reject a system that displays
them, because it's the price of good surround sound. you don't reject
stereo for its lack of rear localisation, either...
> I think part of my confusion is that i'm still thinking of it as having
> I am planning on subs that have their own low-pass filters. I have a
basically, you take fons' example for the octagon, set the speakers up
at the correct angles and then enter the actual distances into the
matrix, so that delay and near-field compensation is correct for your
setup. then you take the example square for the subs, set them into the
corners of the room and again enter the correct distances.
at this point you have two ambdec instances running, one for the tops,
one for the subs. you'd need to adjust the relative loudness with
ambdec's faders. once you've determined the correct relative levels, you
can factor them into the matrix coefficients of the sub decoder and run
both ambdecs at 0dB. now you can hack both matrices into one and end up
with a 12 channel ambdec configuration: 8 tops and four subs. easier to
start up in daily use.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list