From: BenFed express (benfed@intraversal.de)
Date: Thu Sep 16 2010 - 17:16:44 EDT
Thanks, Jim
I guess I was not clear enough. Actually I am not concerned about the
encoding process but the (spacing of the) speaker setup. As far as I
know 5.1 consists of a center speaker (C) at 0°, left (L) and right (R)
speakers at something around -/+30° and left surround (RL) and right
surround (RR) at around -/+ 110°. Now if I keep the angles the same but
increase the radius are sound movements projected as intended, i.e. as
heard in the studio sweet spot? My guess is no or only for a very
limited sweet spot. Of course there will always be some kind of
localization fuzziness in every sound projection setup the farther one's
position from the sweet spot is.
For most of my material I already use only the stereo pairs in the front
and the rear. So these work as a kind of stereophonic "point" sources,
if that's possible at all... But I am not so sure I got your hint about
point sources right.
.b
Am 16.09.10 17:26, schrieb James Phelps:
> Don't know the stipulations re: your Masters project but .... I would
> be inclined to drop the 5.1 encoding (never been a fan) and go with
> separate channels, however many - point source, perhaps.
>
> -Jim
>
>
> --- On *Thu, 9/16/10, BenFed express /<benfed@intraversal.de>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: BenFed express <benfed@intraversal.de>
> Subject: sound movements in 5.1
> To: cec-conference@concordia.ca
> Date: Thursday, September 16, 2010, 10:02 AM
>
> hmm... I am trying this again. Hope I chose the right email adress
> this time. Thanks, Kevin!
>
> ***********************************************************************
>
>
>
> Dear CEC list
>
> I am following your discussion for almost five years now. It was
> (and still is) always interesting, often entertaining and keeps to
> be thought provoking from time to time. Thanks for that, first of all!
>
> Now for the reason I'll stop lurking in the shadows: a question on
> 5.1 mixing concerning the movement of sounds – or even better: its
> reproduction on "stage".
>
>
> This year I am having my master diploma / presentation. Part of it
> will be a 5.1 mix of a sound collage / sound walk (on Bali) of
> which I already did a stereophonic version. Source material are my
> own recordings from a Zoom H2 (mostly 2ch, some 4ch). Which is a
> shame because of its technical limitations, but well, it was the
> only equipment I could afford then and that was acceptable on a
> family vacation... When mixing 5.1 I already find it quite
> difficult to move most stereo sounds from front to back or vice
> versa. Reason being that every little noisy sound would cause
> phase artifacts. That becomes unbearable where most of the
> recordings have some kind of traffic noise, air conditioning,
> water or wind on it.
>
> For the few recordings where it IS acceptable (voices, chanting,
> rhythmical elements, non-continuous sounds) I am wondering the
> following: I am mixing on a 5.1 setup that is positioned way
> tighter (meaning in a smaller space) than the setup I will use for
> reproduction at the presentation. I have a gut feeling that sound
> movements on the small setup will not project on the bigger setup
> as intended, even if the speakers could sit in the exact same
> angles. Am I right with that? Or is it only depended on the
> listener's position how well it works?
>
> I am also wondering if a 5.1 setup (even 7.1 or such) could ever
> be a system for flexible sound reproduction where speaker groups
> are NOT dedicated to specific tasks as in movie sound. Some time
> ago Kevin (I think) was suggesting to fill up the gaps between
> speakers in bigger setups with even more speakers and take an
> algorithmical spatialization approach. I guess that's kind of a
> standard in the acousmatic world, isn't it? I am thinking of BEAST
> and the likes here. I don't know much about ambisonics but think I
> read more complaints about it than rave reviews.
>
> I want to add that I don't see my presentation's setup changing.
> Anyway, I am interested in what a flexible, maybe "standard" way
> of doing this would be. Also, of course, if there is a possibility
> to easily transfer a 5.1 mix to another / an other setup.
>
>
> Thanks for any input on this
>
> .beni
>
> -- www.intraversal.de
>
>
-- www.intraversal.de <http://www.intraversal.de>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 17 2010 - 11:10:23 EDT