Beyond stereo?

[AJ Soundfield]

3 minutes ago, STC said:

There is nothing to like or dislike.

Sure there is. One can have a preference for solo locked in center sweet spot and an iso-ward room, or one can prefer a much wider sweet spot, say entire sofa and a "living" room.

 

Quote

You gave the  impression that the chart is related to some existing speakers.

It is. As it says in  bottom text Geddes. Specific model was NS-15 iirc.

 

Quote

That paper was about some processor that meant to do what you described above. 

No, it was about the specific type polar patterns required, including lots of polar patters illustrated!

How one gets those is variable. Can be done  passively with waveguides, etc, actively with dsp and direct radiators, etc

Quote

Btw, head tracking is not even in the picture unless you are using BACCH and I don't. 

The picture did not show what you allege.

Right, I went by the Audiostream descriptions and this:

Quote

If you move away from the sweet spot ( in a non realtime headtracking BACCH) , you will hear the normal stereo sound that will sound like any stereo when you moved away from the stereo's sweet spot

So I shouldn't believe you either??

My experience with binaural/crosstalk cancel with speakers mirrors you both...

[AJ Soundfield]

3 minutes ago, mav52 said:

What a perfect product for our times - $54k and it will work for exactly one person at a time.

Don't be a hater.

At least it does something. Now a $42k disc transport....

[AJ Soundfield]

3 hours ago, STC said:

 

How can a speaker produce the room cues? Speakers suppose to output what's in the recording. 

This is interesting. Here is what the BACCH site says:

Quote

 

BACCH™ 3D Sound has nothing to do with surround sound. Surround sound, which was originally conceived to make the sound of movies more spectacular, does not (and cannot) attempt to reproduce a 3D soundfield. What 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound aims to do is provide some degree of sound envelopment for the listener by surrounding the listener with five or seven loudspeakers. For serious music listening of music recorded in real acoustic spaces, audio played through a surround sound system can at best give a sense of simulated hall ambiance but cannot offer an accurate 3D representation of the soundfield.

In contrast, BACCH™ 3D Sound’s primary goal is accurate 3D soundfield reproduction. It gives the listener the same 3D audio perspective as that of the ideal listener in the original recording venue².

 

Hmmm, what? Ok, lets find (2)

Quote

²By the “ideal listener in the recoding venue” we mean the actual main stereo recording microphones, or the left and right channels of the stereo master recording, which represent the left and right ear of the ideal listener in the original soundfield.

Ummm, NO. The only instance that is true is a binaural dummy head recording.

Sorry STC, the BACCH system makes zero attempt to perceptually recreate the original soundfield in 99.999% of stereo recordings.

It falls into the exact same category as upmixers. Again, I have no doubt it can sound spectacular with select recordings for one centered listener. But that's it.

It's incomparable to PSR, WFS, etc

[AJ Soundfield]

14 minutes ago, lucretius said:

 

I'm all for widening the sweet spot -- for my main system (which is very modest), I do not sit in the centre.

That is possible to varying degrees using a controlled directivity speaker, equilateral-ish stereo triangle cross-fired (toed in to point just in front of nose). The smaller the speaker, generally, smaller width sweet spot. But it can and is done, based on the figure I posted, where at varying angles, the intensity from one side drops as the other rises, so that the image doesn't collapse to the nearest side as soon as one moves off center a bit.

[AJ Soundfield]

6 minutes ago, semente said:

You didn't read my waterdrop analogy.

Right

[AJ Soundfield]

5 minutes ago, STC said:

 

I guess it must be right coming from someone who is yet to listen to one.  

That is irrelevant. It might sound like the bees-knees to you and I, but it is still a "enhanced" stereo field.

Nothing wrong with that, but not PSR or any such.

I have heard many binaural systems, but not the BACCH. They can sound spectacular on some stereo recordings, terrible on others. Are you saying the BACCH circumvents this, regardless of how many mics and methods used for stereo production?

Btw, again, from the horses mouth: https://www.princeton.edu/3D3A/PureStereo/Pure_Stereose7.html

Quote

The BACCH™ 3D Sound sweet spot is large and robust enough so that a listener sitting in it perceives a high-fidelity 3D image without having to strain to keep his head in a fixed po sition. It does not require any more precision in sitting then standard stereo requires for serious listening. In fact, BACCH™ 3D Sound imaging is so robust that more than one listener can experience most features of the 3D image as long as they sit near the sweet spot, ideally in front or behind it. Moving a few feet to the side of the sweet spot, however, will cause the 3D image to collapse and the sound to be perceived to emanate from the loudspeakers. Therefore, listeners sitting well outside the sweet spot, will hear the sound clearly but it will lack the 3D imaging and sound equalization that the BACCH™ 3D Sound system produces.

Again, IMO, this is a fatal flaw for me. Possibly others too, who would desire a much wider sweet spot.

[AJ Soundfield]

15 minutes ago, semente said:

It's OK to call it immersive or enveloping but it is not a reproduction of the original Soundfield.

 

Correct, which is why if one can read and comprehend word meanings, it's called Perceptual soundfield reconstruction. Not "A fools errand".

[AJ Soundfield]

24 minutes ago, STC said:

 The fatal flaw is comparing 3D sound with stereo. 

Or a super narrow one person sweet spot, great or terrible sound varying by stereo recording, etc, for $54k.

YMMV

Btw, thanks, your evasion/non-answer on the stereo recording wild variability thing that plagues binaural, did in fact provide an answer 

[AJ Soundfield]

23 minutes ago, STC said:

Do you always take things literally?

Like my links/quotes from BACCH website? Absolutely! Why wouldn't I?

Same for all the AES papers I linked too.

 

Quote

If you have read all the links I provided earlier you would have also read that you can move, nod, or turn your head and the 3D image would remain intact. I can demonstrate this anytime

Ahh, so the FAS42 HTIB thing and audio show suggestions doesn't apply to you 

Me neither. But you also said 

Quote

 I do not use BACCH

So your 20+ speaker system is quite different vs those 2 speaker BACCHs, no?

I'm not sure how scalable the BACCH processor is, but it is clearly promoted as 2ch 3D, as in from 2 speakers.

 

Quote

Whatever interpretation you imagine with super narrow which is no different from stereo is in reference to the 3D effect only.  Be clear about that.  

You keep repeating this fallacy, but the fact is "wide" sweet spot stereo doesn't collapse to one spoeaker side like this. Yes, in the sweet spot, binaural/cross cancel like BACCH certainly beats plain stereo in terms of 3D...but you keep evading this varies considerably from recording to recording depending on mic techniques, etc, from spectacular to horrible weird phasiness that plagues all binaural attempts from non-binaural stereo recordings.

That does not happen with "normal" or "wide" stereo.

 

Quote

One thing that bad about binaural is; it is bad for loudspeaker business. There are already headphones technology out there that exceed BACCH or Ambiophonics.

Sure, but the good news is that 99.99% of music recording is stereo, while near zero is binaural. I think speakers have a bit of life left. 

 

[AJ Soundfield]

2 minutes ago, STC said:

I am sure you can nod, shake, move or turn your head with BACCH. There is no reason why it couldn't. No sane person would developed a product and expect listeners to sit still like a dummy head. It even more insane where one actually believed that's the scenario with BACCH.

 

Quote

 

 https://www.princeton.edu/3D3A/PureStereo/Pure_Stereose7.html

  Quote

The BACCH™ 3D Sound sweet spot is large and robust enough so that a listener sitting in it perceives a high-fidelity 3D image without having to strain to keep his head in a fixed po sition. It does not require any more precision in sitting then standard stereo requires for serious listening. In fact, BACCH™ 3D Sound imaging is so robust that more than one listener can experience most features of the 3D image as long as they sit near the sweet spot, ideally in front or behind it. Moving a few feet to the side of the sweet spot, however, will cause the 3D image to collapse and the sound to be perceived to emanate from the loudspeakers. Therefore, listeners sitting well outside the sweet spot, will hear the sound clearly but it will lack the 3D imaging and sound equalization that the BACCH™ 3D Sound system produces.

 

 

The BACCH website itself is not to be taken literally?

 

Quote

And my system is meant for 2.0, 4.0 or 5.1,.  You took it upon yourself to bring up the 29 speakers where I have clearly stated that they act as the wall to reproduce the preferred choice of impulse response. The use of convolution is not limited to Ambiophonics but it can be used for plain stereo or multi channel.

So the 2ch sound quality using crosstalk cancellation is invariant to stereo recording/mics technique?

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, mav52 said:

In the Stereophile interview " the system can be calibrated for a range of listener positions, the Bacch-SP system uses an infrared camera to track the listener's head position and make real-time adjustments to compensate for the change in the listening sweet spot "

Right, aka head tracking, mentioned numerous times previously. Is that something you would desire?

You listen only solo?

[AJ Soundfield]

4 minutes ago, STC said:

Unless you are a giraffe your head will not move as far as few feet. 

Or you don't always sit dead center alone in an iso-ward, like an audiophile.

 

Quote

Yes, it is meant for all sound that emanates from the front LCR. It doesn't care whether they are binaural or plain stereo. 

Cool, yet another evasion about stereo recording SQ using crosstalk cancel binaural.

Well, that provides an answer too.

 

Quote

No friends visiting?  Most of the your argument is like someone who refuses to use 3D glasses and yet argue about 3D TV based on what's written somewhere. 

Nope. But heard plenty binaural, good and bad.

How many wide stereo + diffuse decorrelated independent driven indirect radiation fronts + 2 Logic7 rears have you heard?

[AJ Soundfield]

3 minutes ago, STC said:

OMG! It means that many listeners can sit and enjoy full 3D sound without any compromise.

From 99.99% of recordings? BS

[AJ Soundfield]

3 minutes ago, mav52 said:

 Sure AJ, you give me $54k and I will listen solo to my hearts content and I will even use your speakers. .

You give me $54k and I wont stick anything in your ears

[AJ Soundfield]

7 minutes ago, STC said:

I am am not interested in listening far away from my sweet spot.

Great, I am. As are many others. Again, if sticking stuff in ears, sitting alone centered in an iso-ward, etc. is your thing, great, knock yourself out with BACCH and XTC whatever. It isn't mine.

 

7 minutes ago, STC said:

If you think it is BS

I don't think its BS, it is BS, because stereo recording mic methods vary wildly, just like any form of binaural w/ crosstalk cancel attempting to reproduce them does. That's what you confirmed by evading.

[AJ Soundfield]

1 hour ago, STC said:

 

Not evading

Except you are and the fact is that attempts of binaural with crosstalk cancel playing stereo recordings date back to Polk SDS (heard), Carver Sonic Holography (heard), DIY room center divided (heard) and many true binaural recording via headphone. The fact remains that with stereo recordings, binaural with crosstalk cancel is highly variable, which is exactly why no more Polk SDA, Carver holography, etc, etc.

It appeals to a tiny vocal fringe who thinks it's the only way, but that's irrelevant to 99.99% of stereo recordings, that aren't binaural. I'm ok with them sitting alone in their iso-wards, but not me.

Your 20+ speakers method would sell me lots of speakers, but unfortunately that fringe market is small.

So I'm ok with other methods, including ones shown superior:

http://www.desena.org/multichannel/Ambisonics_2_Int_Symp_2010.pdf

Your religious fervor about binaural with crosstalk cancel confines you to prothlesizing about the one that suits your iso needs, but fails to account for the preferences of others who don't desire solo spot iso-ward experiences. 

[AJ Soundfield]

3 hours ago, AJ Soundfield said:

How many wide stereo + diffuse decorrelated independent driven indirect radiation fronts + 2 Logic7 rears have you heard?

Still no answer. 

[AJ Soundfield]

21 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

 

Actually, That's not exactly accurate! I mostly listen to classical music, but I am also a fan of Celtic/American folk music, bluegrass (instrumental only), film soundtracks (Rozsa, Steiner, Tiomkin, Elmer Bernstein, John Barry, etc.) as well as "traditional" jazz (Getz, Davis, Brubeck, and at least a hundred more). I even have a "Beach Boys" CD (but that's it for "rock"). 

Me too, minus the Beach Boys.

Any chance of sharing the recordings you made so I can hear this stereo soundfield reconstruction rivaling MCH?

[AJ Soundfield]

Quote

I am sure you can nod, shake, move or turn your head with BACCH. 

Yeah...and not much more 

 

Different strokes for different folks I guess...

[AJ Soundfield]

13 hours ago, STC said:

 

That explains. Someone comparing XTC in an analogue era.

Wrong:

Quote

The Johnston/Lam system is compared with a horizontal 2nd order Ambisonics. The B-Format signals are encoded via the Furse-Malham 2nd-order coefficients (FMH-Format) [10] and decoded using the “in-phase” coefficients. The CDP MultiChannel software toolkit available at [11] has been employed

It got beat, deal with it.

 

Quote

and still no answer what binaural system you listened to.

Still no reading comprehension obviously.

[AJ Soundfield]

13 hours ago, STC said:

 

How long is the video in the picture?

No, he is a Chinese gentleman iirc. What does he have to do with this??

 

Quote

That is something I coulnt do.

 

Right, that single line of 5 chairs says it all. I and most folks don't want that. But obviously a fervent fringe do.

Look, here I am with my assistant explaining to an audiophile why confined seating and room treatments isn't for everyone.

 

YMMV

[AJ Soundfield]

11 hours ago, STC said:

btw is this your speakers? If it so I don't see great soundscape there. 

Those aren't the droids we're looking for.

Once more, for those 99% stereo recordings:

 

For the fronts, something like these but not passive for tube amps, but fully active, with separate input driven rear 3x3 phased array, delayed, diffuse, decorrelated (see 3D right there), lots of DSP. No analogue era stuff.

[AJ Soundfield]

13 hours ago, STC said:

You don't stick any thing in your ears with BACCH

....except the first time when they calibrate the system for BACCH.

So you were for it before you were against it. Ok.

[AJ Soundfield]

10 hours ago, STC said:

Correcting myself. Apparently, I hear them often in the car. And if that's  what Logic7 is about then it is a long way to go for  3D sound.

Swing and a miss 

 

Quote

Logic7 is about making stereo for multi channel

Nope.

You probably can't get this, but the Logic7 isn't used for the fronts, just the surrounds. Fronts are "pure" unadulterated stereo. Well, sorta...

[AJ Soundfield]

If there was a plate full of cookies on the audio rack, I'd be the first in line