Excellent introduction for someone like me who is new to ambisonics!🏆😉👍

Amazing! This was so well done and incredibly helpful. Thank you!

Thanks, this was very informative and understandable!

thank you that helped me alot to get Ambisonic to work in Davinci Resolve / Fairlight

Great Overview!

Thanks so much for your work. Much appreciated! 😀

Thank you so much for making this vid bro 🙏

Thank you for your explanation. very good. ;)

Thank you so much

2:54 you meant "add 1 to the order number then cube" to get the number of channels (and minimum number of sensors)

Can Ambisonics be used with old AV receivers? I have one with Dolby Pro Logic I and I was wondering if I could use this to mix music and edit videos in surround sound.

Thank you and easy to understand the basic information, but you need your experience to handle thes files 6 channels to name it “simply do” .. if you have no experience with ambisonic, (just stereo until now) .. and I wonder how long will it take to learn it. You motivated me ..

Thanks for video. My question is about how can ı reproduce 2th order ambisonics correctly? I mean is there any recomandation from İTU or AES for ambisonic speaker placement for 2th order or 3th order ambisonics?

I want to know how to use Ambisonics in Cubase or Nuendo.

fantastic! When can we expect the next video on mixing?

@AlteraSound

2 жыл бұрын

It's three days away!

@jordanelliottprosser7495

2 жыл бұрын

@@AlteraSound excited

@marty2x1

2 жыл бұрын

@@AlteraSound Did this happen? Would love to see this!

Holy shit! I think i just wey myself at the Mere idea of ambisonics! 🤤

I almost didn't watch this bc I thought it was going to be the same annoying BS as usual -thank you for the pleasant surprise :D

At the start of your video during both moments you said "3D" and "Panning" my earbuds glitched to provide wild stereo images of those words. wtf & thx

hey thanks for the video! very much interesting.. I don't quite understand though: whats the advantage of ambisonics in order to doing a mix? I thought you record with ambisonic in order to have the almost realistic 3D listening experience from that exakt recording spot - meaning a mix so to say, with a lot of reflection and room. As soon as you re-mix those decoded single files you screw that though, don't you? - So in the end in that case I dont see why you would do an ambisonic recording at all to start with..

@SamHocking

7 ай бұрын

There's no such thing as an Ambisonic mic really, even though people do call them Ambisonics mics, it's really not correct. Ambisonics mics are just normal mics orientated in a way that makes encoding to Ambisonics more straightforward, but they still suffer the loss inherent in Ambisoncis encoding as the encoding process does consume some audio to convert to speherical domain so suffers Dynamic Range and Frequency Range loss once decoded back to the speakers representing each mic. This is lossy and why some spatial audio engineers would not consider Ambisonics to record live or field recording.

@thenakedandfamousS

7 ай бұрын

@@SamHocking okay, but still, you do choose such a mic and sunsequently use the multiple files you get from that for a mix? why? do you use them encoded - decoded or raw? thank you so much for your answers! :)

@SamHocking

7 ай бұрын

@@thenakedandfamousS For live/field recording with mics I would keep the recording and mixing process entirely within a PCM workflow, so Spatial PCM / channel or object-based mixing. I really don't see any benefits encoding the channel-based PCM signal recorded by an 'ambisonics' mic to actual Ambisonics and losing so much of the recording fidelity to the spherical harmonics conversion, when ultimately for playback it all must return to a PCM channel again to hear it, so just record in the array that matched the playback. If it were me I would use something like ORTF3D and SPS 8 workflows. Less is always more and everything captured in a mic should always null when passed through the workflow untouched. In Ambisonics that's just not possible so imo not best practice. e.g. you would never accept a process in mono or stereo recoding that couldn't null with what is recorded so why accept it in spatial audio?

@SamHocking

7 ай бұрын

@@thenakedandfamousS Yes, keep the signal in it's original recoded spatial PCM state rather than convert it to spherical harmonics and back to PCM for speaker/headphone playback again which is lossy. I just think the SPS 8 / Cube mic setups like ORTF 3D, Audio Technica BP3600 sound better than anything possible in ambisonics and no encoding required. Th 8 mic cube is also much closer to the listening reality of stereo, binaural and surround/atmos too. Apart from a couple of niche/academic possibilities in Ambisonics domain, everything can be done in simple Spatial PCM recording / Mach 1 in my messing around. I always struggle to see exactly what i'm gaining departing the recorded signal which is already encoded with the spatial and binaural context without touching it.

Well, I still enjoy binaural... Cause I have 2 ears, maybe? And the question - my EAX if I turn it on has some strange effects on the intro part. Is it deliberate? ;) Edit - quite old sound setup here, Sennh HD650+Creative Elite Pro PCI. THAT old...

ambisonics is psychoacoustic. How can a sound wave coming from 4 speakers be perceived as coming from a single point? With four speakers, the brain receives 8 versions of the signal. My brain decodes this as diffuse mono. As I move about the space, the time and phase differences remain frozen in the space. No two people will hear the same thing, so how can a signal be 'produced' that works in all spaces for all locations. The same goes for the microphone of the same name. Be well, and listen carefully.

Much too fast and not detailed enough...

@MacImPack

Жыл бұрын

For me good pace. Could always get deeper, but not in 9 min.