Subject: Re: Re[2]: [linux-audio-user] Audio 3-D Demo --- Any Interest in Software?
From: Mark Knecht (markknecht_AT_comcast.net)
Date: Sun Jan 04 2004 - 04:55:20 EET
On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 16:14, davidrclark_AT_earthlink.net wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
You're welcome.
>
> Previously I had asked if anyone would be interested in my packaging
> some of my work so that others could use it. As you may know, this can
> be a daunting task,
I don't, but I imagine it might be.
> and I wanted to know whether or not anyone would
> find the "capability" useful before dumping a lot of time in creating
> a useable "program." It's like before I build you a car, I ask you
> if you have any need for transportation.
>
> If everyone is happy with the second (and fourth) clip, then I won't
> bother trying to write the requisite GUI interface and docs that
> I need to convince everyone to look at. I'm perfectly happy with
> my command-line and scripts, what I have called a "retro-UNIX" environment,
> for audio.
This would likely work for many people I'm sure if the goal was to
preprocess a complete recording.
>
> So my question is whether or not anyone else has a use or need for this
> type of sound --- vastly improved headphone sound?
This is the part of your presentation that I find interesting and
somewhat different than my view. I personally don't think good
headphones make most recordings sound bad. Bad headphones sound bad no
matter what the recording. Bad recording can sound very bad in
headphones, but really good recordings sound quite good. (To me... I
listen to about 3-4 hours of music a day on headphones and am quite used
to hearing certain recordings both ways.)
Headphones do tend to sound a lot more 'close in' than listening in an
open room though and certainly you're technology tend to give more sense
of space. This could also have some uses in just some specialized mixing
applications where you want to give some distance to a single
instrument, for instance, so I'd encourage you to think about bit about
how this technology relates to bus oriented reverbs, etc.
> This is a way of
> creating accurate but simulated binaural recordings for larger rooms from
> a monophonic, dry signal. It's a better way of producing what you actually
> hear in a room than that which is done with the typical mixer and synth.
So is this IR based? I've been testing a new IR reverb that's not on the
market yet. It's quite nice.
>
> Thanks again for your response.
My pleasure.
- Mark
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Jan 04 2004 - 04:57:59 EET