similar to: Ambisonia proposal

2008/9/25 e deleflie <edeleflie at gmail.com>: > Hi Vorbis-dev, > Hi, > I've been on this list for a couple of weeks, but its been quiet, so I > dont know who is who. > > My name is Etienne Deleflie, I am the creator of www.ambisonia.com, > and I am (together with the Ambisonic community) looking for a > 'delivery format' for Ambisonic data. > >

"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

All, Progress has been made on the proposed draft spec for integrating ambisonics into vorbis. We are not yet finished (should be soon), but you can see the progress here: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=df4dtw69_3626qqq6st The issue we have hit now concerns how/who would implement the encoding and decoding in Vorbis Tools. Because ambisonics uses spherical harmonic components, an ambisonic file

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?

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) What I'd like to propose is a simple way to encode ambisonic files in vorbis comments as simple tags. By this I don't

On 2/28/07, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/28/07, Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > > Well, there are todo pages at wiki.xiph.org, but I meant more in the > > community folklore sense. My point is a roadmap doesn't help much unless > > there are people committed to making things happen. That's been the > > problem with a

On 2/28/07, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves <justivo@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/28/07, Ralph Giles <giles@xiph.org> wrote: > > Well, there are todo pages at wiki.xiph.org, but I meant more in the > > community folklore sense. My point is a roadmap doesn't help much unless > > there are people committed to making things happen. That's been the > > problem with a

Hi, this message is a cross-post to the Sursound and ogg-dev mailig list. The developers on the ogg-dev list are defining the Ogg/PCM format and on Sursound list there discussion about Amisonics file formats recently. I have not been able to follow both disussion, just skimmed through. But maybe you can work together to bring Ambisonics into Ogg/PCM? :) http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM

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

Hi Flac Developers, My name is Etienne Deleflie, I'm the founder of http://www.ambisonia.com and, more recently, http://soundofspace.com. Myself and the community I serve are looking for a lossless file format that can encapsulate ambisonic encoding. To this end a specification has been drafted, and is nearing stability, that describes practical features designed to get the most out of

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

On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 05:30:10PM +0100, oliver oli wrote: > John Koleszar wrote: > >I hadn't even heard > >of ambisonics until your post, to be honest. > > because people don't know how to distribute ambisonics. no way to play > it in a DVD player. there are no easy to use software players that > decode ambisonic files and there are no widely used audio

Hello Tim and others, Thanks for your help explaining this process on IRC. I wrote out a first draft in the RFC xml format. I have attached the xml (labeled as xml.txt so it will appear inline) and the rendered txt files. Please let me know where I can make improvements. I will upload this draft to the IETF datatracker and send it out to codec@ after addressing your comments. -------------- next

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

This is getting very dangerous. We cannot take our flamewar to outside mailing lists without making a complete fool of ourselves. Arc, would you please refrain from doing so in future and rather come to an internal agreement beforehand? Arc, there are a few things you have missed: The discussion on OggPCM2 was friendly and constructive and there were no flame wars and the spec got much further

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

Since the opusenc and opusinfo changes were independent I split them up and landed the opusinfo changes (with updated mapping family numbers). - Mark On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:22 AM, Mark Harris <mark.hsj at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Drew, > > Sorry for the delay. > > FYI the patch that you attached is not your latest version. This > thread that you replied to is an older

Howdy, There's quite a lot of big stuff to discuss, so I believe the July meeting should not be skipped. I'm proposing it to the next Wednesday at 0:60 am UTC 0 time, and if possible I would like that as many Xiph members as possible would attend. If you do not agree with either the time or date or both, please suggest another date/time. If it will not be possible for you to attend at

Howdy, There's quite a lot of big stuff to discuss, so I believe the July meeting should not be skipped. I'm proposing it to the next Wednesday at 0:60 am UTC 0 time, and if possible I would like that as many Xiph members as possible would attend. If you do not agree with either the time or date or both, please suggest another date/time. If it will not be possible for you to attend at

Howdy, There's quite a lot of big stuff to discuss, so I believe the July meeting should not be skipped. I'm proposing it to the next Wednesday at 0:60 am UTC 0 time, and if possible I would like that as many Xiph members as possible would attend. If you do not agree with either the time or date or both, please suggest another date/time. If it will not be possible for you to attend at