similar to: 5.1 surround channel coupling

The prospect of people actually putting B-format audio (via the panner or directly input) into Ogg/Vorbis brings an interesting challenge: What do we do with the audio after decoding it? The following sane options exist: A) Simply output the B-format audio B) Produce a downmix 1) Mono. 2) Stereo blumlein crossed pairs 3) Stereo UHJ 4) binaural C) Produce speaker feeds 1) Fully

"Gabriel I." wrote: > Greetings, > > I apologize if I posted this in the wrong list, I wasn't sure where to post > it, but seeing as the tags are called "vorbis comments" I thought vorbis, > rather than ogg-dev, would be the right choice. (actually, I'm not even a > developer anyway) Hi Gabriel, I doubt whether the Xiph community would promote a

Hi, I have posted this three times to the flac-dev, vorbis-dev, and ogg-dev mailing lists. I wanted to see what code there was currently to support Ambisonics. So I downloaded the code from the xiph download page for libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2, vorbis-tools-1.1.1 and flac-1.1.4, but wasn't able to find anything. If it exists then I missed it, so could somebody please point me to it.

On Sat, 28 May 2016 16:21:33 -0700, Michael Graczyk <mgraczyk at google.com> wrote : > Hi Marc, Hi Micheal. > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 10:44 AM, Marc Lavallée <marc at hacklava.net> > wrote: > > I subscribed because your discussion on the IETF draft ("Ambisonics > > in an Ogg Opus Container") was mentioned on the sursound list. > > Thanks for

On 3/22/07, Brian Willoughby <brianw@sounds.wa.com> wrote: ... > But to return to your question, exactly what kind of "support" are > you looking for? I wasn't looking for any particular support, but just to see what support was there (if any). ... > I do not believe that there is any need for code specifically > supporting Ambisonics. FLAC supports conversion to

Josh Coalson wrote: > --- smoerk <smoerk@gmx.de> wrote: > >>i didn't find anything about tagging flac files as surround files. i >>think there should some possibility to tell the player how to play a >>multi-channel file (how to map the different channels to the speakers >>or if there some decode is needed, like for ambisonic files). > > > it

Hi Opus list. I subscribed because your discussion on the IETF draft ("Ambisonics in an Ogg Opus Container") was mentioned on the sursound list. I tried Opus for ambisonics more than a year ago. It does works with uncoupled channels (I had to patch the encoder). I don't know what else could be done to optimize support for ambisonics, as I'm not a codec expert. So I think that

Where can I find the Header file or whatever which specifies the "Mapping" flag. In feb - apr 2007, there was a lot of discussion about Ambisonics and Monty kindly stated that Mapping = 1 ; Denotes and Ambisonic file as opposed to = 0 which is 1 speaker/ 1 channel Has this been written explicitly into the standard? Which standard should I be looking at?

On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:41:37 -0700 Michael Graczyk <mgraczyk at google.com> wrote: > UHJ is an interesting way to preserve compatibility with non-ambisonic > playback systems. However, I have not seen it generalized to higher > orders. I expect that its popularity will decrease as HOA becomes more > and more common. If UHJ becomes popular in the future, we could > specify

It obviously would be nice to have such a mode available, for e.g. DVD audio compression. Apparently, the list doesn''t tell me too much about it. My questions are: 1. What is the current status of the 5.1 channel coupling in Vorbis? 2. If I''ll be interested in participation in its development, what is the recommended reading? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML

i didn't find anything about tagging flac files as surround files. i think there should some possibility to tell the player how to play a multi-channel file (how to map the different channels to the speakers or if there some decode is needed, like for ambisonic files). any idea how to implement it?

Hi everyone, Over the last two weeks or so, I've been thinking about how to add surround sound to Ogg -- and more than that, to do it in the best way possible. With this in mind, I started considering using Ambisonic surround sound. The advantages of this format are considerable: a) It was developed in the early to mid '70s, so the patents should be expired by now.

I threw a rough draft of an alternative format incorporating the comments received so far in this discussion on the wiki: http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM#Format Oliver, This seems to me like it would support the ambisonic requirements you mention, though it doesn't (and I imagine won't) describe the mic locations. Somebody who actually uses that info could probably define extra

Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 14:51:12 +0100 (BST) From: DG Malham <dgm2@york.ac.uk> To: vorbis-dev@xiph.org Cc: DG Malham <dgm2@york.ac.uk>, Rob Fletcher <rpf1@york.ac.uk> Subject: Re: [vorbis-dev] True surround sound for Ogg -- a proposal (fwd) In-Reply-To: <Pine.SGI.3.95L.1000710092216.9043693B-100000@turpin.york.ac.uk> Message-ID:

Michael Grave just posted a question about surround conferences. http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=564633430#/note.php?note_id=5009726 3908&id=564633430&index=0 I didn't see it posted on the ast-list, what do you think? Does something like this have potential? I'd love to listen in on one of these calls to see how it actually sounds if someone builds a trial

I made a few updates to OggPCM2 http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM2 reflecting the latest discussions. Could everyone have a look at it and see if they agree. Otherwise, what do you feel should be changed? Anyone wants to speak in support of chunked PCM? For all those that are just tired of this mess like me, please express yourself in the new spec I created: OggPCM3

Friendly ping for the opus-tools patch... ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Drew Allen <bitllama at google.com> Date: Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support for Ambisonics To: opus at xiph.org <opus at xiph.org> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:52 AM Drew Allen <bitllama at google.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > Sorry for the delay (got really

Hello, We (Google) have been experimenting with configuration and adjustments to CELT-only Opus that give good results for compressing ambisonic audio signals [1]. Based on our results so far, we would like to use Opus to encode spatial audio. We hope to make it easy/possible to use libopus with other common tools and software modules (ffmpeg/libav in particular). Based on my reading of the

Tim, Would you mind giving me a more specific example of the sort of document that you think this should look like? I'd like to write up something that is somewhat final. On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Michael Graczyk <mgraczyk at google.com> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:32 PM, Timothy B. Terriberry > <tterribe at xiph.org> wrote: > > As a general point,

Hi all, My apologies for the confusion ... but I am re-naming this thread again because the proposal doesn't come from Ambisonia. As the founder of Ambisonia I have only been 'mediating' between some members of the ambisonic community ... so it would be wrong to associate the spec with Ambisonia. To clarify. This is what the spec proposes: - that Mapping = 1 means the contents are