Best Bets for Binaural?

[Mark A. Jay]

So...

A few of us who frequent the various binaural / signal processing threads got to talking, and collectively, we all kind of had the same questions pertaining to binaural and making it more accessible, namely:

* How can we bridge resources, taking into account the vast variety of styles / approaches used in binaural?

* What are the biggest barriers, as you perceive them, to making binaural a 'breakout' technology (though it's been around for nearly 100 years now) that the masses can embrace?

* Exploration of the binaural continuum; this could be anything from the less approachable (things such as sound art as well as other uses such as gaming et al) to the more approachable (classical / jazz / vocal) binaural material.

* Are there collaborative opportunities that can be facilitated through this thread or other social networking media?

* Are there other binaural free-lance opportunities out there for folks like us who have this gear, but are far from the desired production site?

* In binaural, what works well (based on your experience), and what doesn't. In other words, in your experience, is one genre of music particularly well-suited to the approach and other genre not at all? What about venues? That is, best results in a concert hall, a club? Where and why?

* What about hybrid approaches? That is, projects in which you have used both binaural and conventional techniques, or perhaps use of binaural in 5.1 / 7.1 surround mixes?

Granted, it's a lot to cover, but I welcome your comments. Also, I think this could be a good forum in which to post binaural content samples, either finished product, or works in process that you wish to share or have critiqued.

So, with that...post your thoughts, comments, and (binaural) files here.

Also, if you do choose to post, can you please make it a point to indicate the type of recording it is. That is, please list whether your sample is mannequin binaural (mannequin head microphone), Human binaural (i.e. mics in / near ears), hybrid binaural (a binaural technique plus another) and so on. Also, please list which microphones were used, and whether or not any additional signal processing has been done. If you want to list other gear used as part of the process, that's cool as well.

Thanks,

Mark

[RickZ]

During a recent college choir concert, a select group of about 10 singers moved forward, and stood in a semi-circle around my mic stand. Even though my mic setup is not binaural, per se, I thought I'd share the result, which seems pretty immersive in my headphones.

Attached pic shows Senn MKH8040 pair about 45 deg l/r, and Neumann KM184 pair, 90 deg l/r. I recorded these on 2 SD 702's, and mixed pretty much equal amounts.

FWIW,
Rick Z

[dallas simpson]

Originally Posted by RickZ

During a recent college choir concert, a select group of about 10 singers moved forward, and stood in a semi-circle around my mic stand. Even though my mic setup is not binaural, per se, I thought I'd share the result, which seems pretty immersive in my headphones.
...snip

Excellent recording RickZ, really first rate. What I would call spatial stereo. Excellent definition, excellent sound quality. Any radio broadcast or CD would be proud to offer such a fine recording. For this type of vocal performance capture it works well, translates well on speakers and headphones, but as you say not binaural per se.

That is not a criticism, I repeat not a criticism, but it leads to a 'close around the head' spatial experience. A comparison between pure binaural vs your 4 mic spatial system, using this set up of singers, would IMHO only show a small measure of difference, but perhaps would become more apparent if the singers were a little further away and in a circle surrounding the recording systems, and some singers sitting on the floor, and others standing on chairs - if you see what I mean. Although I am interested in hearing the vertical resolution of your 4 mic system. I would expect some vertical information to be preserved with the set up you illustrate. Perhaps you could do a test recording to share with us.

Great stuff RickZ!

Attached is a seascape with full binaural surround sound - OK its not a choir, but I don't have any binaural choir recordings. Headphones essential. Please have a listen to the spatial presentation. You should hear sounds moving all around you apparently coming clearly from outside of your head as if you were actually present at the recording location,

cheers,
dallas.

[Emil Sauer]

After been in touch with Mark I would like to involve myself in this debate.
I am a Sound Engineering student at The Conservatory of Contemporary Music Copenhagen (Rytmisk Musikkonservatorium: Dansk) and I am currently working on my bachelor project which is about implementing binaural recordings in rhythmic music.

I have been fortunate to lend a KEMAR from G.R.A.S. and have done recordings of 6 different bands at 2 different venues, a final rehearsal with the danish radios symphonic orchestra and choir (200 musicians and singers) at the new danish radio symphonic hall and vocal dubs and re-amped synth tracks for a hip hop track.
The idea of the hip hop project is to see how binaural recordings can be mixed together with normal recordings.

My conclusion so far is that there is great potential for binaural recordings; people really seem to like listening to binaural stereo, but it's not so simple as I had hoped for. Recording loud concerts in big concert venues has one big problem: placing the dummy in the sweet spot. I am not a fan of wearing binaural microphones for music recordings, unless you have an image to go with it, so I have had to place my microphone by the FOH position, which in these cases (and most cases) is in the diffuse sound field and then you don't really get the punchiness from the PA system. For rock music I prefer punchiness before the surround field (having audience standing right behind the dummy highly improves this) so one of the concerts I had to guard the dummy to get it close enough to the PA system without someone knocking it to the floor. (see picture below).

For future applications of binaural stereo I lean most to mixing in surround 5.1. and then converting the signal to binaural stereo. Then you can always do a normal stereo version as well.
For touring bands I can see a big commercial idea in bringing along a binaural microphone and then selling the recordings immediately after the show.

Keeping it short for now, I will be posting as long as I can contribute to this important debate.

All the best,
Emil

[dallas simpson]

Emil - great post glad to have you on board.

There are a lot of elements to this thread. This post follows on from the seascape and is an attempt to characterise how the acoustic environment and recording technique affects binaural presentation.

In an outdoor near anechoic environment binaural localisation is optimal. The microphone technique of Rick Z gives excellent spatial stereo, but out of the head localisation is necessarily limited.

The attached recording of a Gamelan workshop with youth in a small room shows both the impact of sound sources of varying size with different timbres, and the effect of wall / floor / ceiling reflections. The headphone binaural spatial surround sound is good, but not as pin sharp as the seascape. Spatial definition would be sharper if the Gamelan was recorded outdoors at a suitable location.

I recorded the sounds, using custom modified in-ear DPA4060's to DAP1 DAT.
dallas.

Recording courtesy of Gamelan At Work, www.gamelanatwork.com

[Emil Sauer]

David - thank you. I'm glad to have found these threads.

The classical recording I have done I recorded from two different positions. The first one from 1. balcony - 1. row in the middle and the second from the floor 3rd row in the middel (as in the picture I posted).
From the balcony it is very hard to position anything really, and it's more like a normal stereo recording, because of all the reflections. But when recorded from 3rd rowI got much more accuracy. For classical recordings I think it would be best to have the binaural microphone on the directors podium, maybe even hanging from the ceiling behind the director in a 45 degree angel 6-10 feet away together with a fixed fisheye video camera.

Anyone done recordings with binaural microphones hanging from the ceiling?
I thought about that when I recorded concerts to get the microphone placed closer to the sweet spot.

[Frisbieinstein]

Originally Posted by Mark A. Jay

So...

* What are the biggest barriers, as you perceive them, to making binaural a 'breakout' technology (though it's been around for nearly 100 years now) that the masses can embrace?

I always thought the Big Problem was that someone might play it through a mono system. Even cars have stereo now, so maybe the time is right?

[paulmun]

Interesting topic. With regards to your question:

* What are the biggest barriers, as you perceive them, to making binaural a 'breakout' technology (though it's been around for nearly 100 years now) that the masses can embrace?

I wonder how more amazing binaural technology would sound if it incorporated the head movement of the user and somehow changed with the users head movements using some of the technology employed in the Wii/iphone for detecting movement and blending of multiple simultaneous head position recordings accordingly. Would love to see how much that would help with preserving the Binaural illusion.

[GuySonic]

Been researching and developing this type of gear since 1985 and found the main problem with 'binaural' from becoming more popular is a lack of discrimination about HRTF recording methods.

Binaural is commonly known as IN-or-near-ear mic placement recordings, and is a TYPE of HRTF recording method, but is just one of many HRTF methods with each having advantages, and disadvantages producing different results, and useful for different purposes.

My tips page has links to HRTF information for discriminating the differences.

My personal contribution to HRTF methods as compared to ear placement Binaural is HERE.

Many hundreds of recordings done with my own take on HRTF over the years on page 1 and page two of my site.

In my opinion, HRTF mic arrays are the only ones capable of consistently recording virtual reality audio, and are a vastly underrated professional methodology for recording all types of live and re-recorded sounds.

Fortunately for me and certain audiences, the film/game audio professionals have adopted HRTF recording methods far more easily than the music industry as evident by the very partial posting on my Film Credits page.

[Emil Sauer]

Originally Posted by paulmun

I wonder how more amazing binaural technology would sound if it incorporated the head movement of the user and somehow changed with the users head movements using some of the technology employed in the Wii/iphone for detecting movement and blending of multiple simultaneous head position recordings accordingly. Would love to see how much that would help with preserving the Binaural illusion.

That has been a huge thing in the gaming industry for some years now.
This link is about 3D imaging which goes together with the implementation of virtual surround.
YouTube - Head Tracking for Desktop VR Displays using the WiiRemote

Here's a link to Smyth Research about surround on headphones with headtracking.
Smyth Research

It's all algorithm based and by time it will be possible (if not already) to implement the features in very small "wav." players (mp3 is going to fade out sooner or later...)

TC Electronics has a binaural monitoring function that can be added on their 6000 system, so that you can bounce your multi channel 5.1 mix down to a binaural stereo track. Unfortunately I haven't been able to test that yet, but I am planning to do so before mid June.

Maybe someone here has already tested it out and could post some examples??

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by paulmun

I wonder how more amazing binaural technology would sound if it incorporated the head movement of the user and somehow changed with the users head movements using some of the technology employed in the Wii/iphone for detecting movement and blending of multiple simultaneous head position recordings accordingly. Would love to see how much that would help with preserving the Binaural illusion.

Hmmm...theoretically, for it to be technically accurate you would have to have a host of impulse responses for each position the head could likely be in a given space, and these would have to be convolved, in real time, based on the data from the controller.

Again, I said for this to be as 'technically accurate' as possible this huge array of impulse responses would have to be known / accessible.

However, accuracy may not be of interest to some (or many), and the idea of the binaural playback being a function of occupant head movement is a fascinating one. I can see how it could make for some very interesting synthetic effects as well.

Also, my suspicion is that changes in the impulse response (as a function of position in the space as well as the person's head) would be highly dependent on the boundary conditions and in some cases, there would be little to no change in the binaural output based on changes in the person's head position (because the impulse responses would be largely independent of position). One example of this (albeit an academic one) is a fully reverberant chamber (typically used in acoustic testing). In such a space, it really would not matter how a person's head (or a binaural head) was oriented (provided they / the head was not close to a boundary).

On the other hand, as the boundary conditions gradually morphed from reverberant to anechoic, then the minor differences in position relative to the source(s) would likely become much more important in terms of the impulse responses, and certainly so when approximating close to fully anechoic conditions.

Kinda makes me wonder how one would tackle something like this...maybe this is something best suited to a sort of neural network or other tactic capable of assimilating these heavily-weighted factors and filling in the blanks.

No pun intended, but just thinking about it makes my head spin.

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Emil Sauer

I have been fortunate to lend a KEMAR from G.R.A.S. and have done recordings of 6 different bands at 2 different venues, a final rehearsal with the danish radios symphonic orchestra and choir (200 musicians and singers) at the new danish radio symphonic hall ...
For rock music I prefer punchiness before the surround field (having audience standing right behind the dummy highly improves this) so one of the concerts I had to guard the dummy to get it close enough to the PA system without someone knocking it to the floor. (see picture below).

Emil: AT first, I merely glanced at the picture of the orchestra. However, I have to say that of the orchestras that I have recorded, not one of them had the risers that are present in that photo. This is very interesting as what I am used to hearing here in the states is the orchestra assembled on a flat stage - there is no change in elevation, at least not for the orchestras I have listened to or recorded.

Very, very interesting.

This may sound foolish, but is this typical for the orchestra there to practice as well as perform situated in this manner?

[Emil Sauer]

Originally Posted by Mark A. Jay

Emil: AT first, I merely glanced at the picture of the orchestra. However, I have to say that of the orchestras that I have recorded, not one of them had the risers that are present in that photo. This is very interesting as what I am used to hearing here in the states is the orchestra assembled on a flat stage - there is no change in elevation, at least not for the orchestras I have listened to or recorded.

Very, very interesting.

This may sound foolish, but is this typical for the orchestra there to practice as well as perform situated in this manner?

Yes it is. The risers are fully flexible and can be raised or lowered to fit different orchestrations. They also have a rehearsel/recording studio in the same building with the exact same dynamic stage.

It's a very impressing concert hall actually.
The four studios - dr.dk/Koncerthuset

I don't now if they have always played on risers, nor if it's a European trend, as I'm not so much in to classical recordings.

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Emil Sauer

Yes it is. The risers are fully flexible and can be raised or lowered to fit different orchestrations. They also have a rehearsel/recording studio in the same building with the exact same dynamic stage.

It's a very impressing concert hall actually.
The four studios - dr.dk/Koncerthuset

I don't now if they have always played on risers, nor if it's a European trend, as I'm not so much in to classical recordings.

If you think about it...instruments in an orchestra are used to "seeing" an acoustic load that is defined by the instrument-to-plane distance (the plane as defined by the floor) as well as the dimensions / acoustics (i.e. how absorptive or reflective) of that plane itself. Elevating the instruments on the risers must affect their acoustic loading and therefore, their radiation pattern. So it goes that if the radiation pattern is affected, so too should be the timbre.

I think that (if it were possible) it would be interesting to compare a recording (binaural as well as other techniques) for the same orchestra playing in an elevated fashion (such as shown in the picture posted by Emil) versus a flat surface. Of course (and thankfully), the musicians are human, so no matter how much they tried to play the piece the same way for both parts of the experiment, they would no doubt play slightly differently (one could argue this would happen merely because of the differences in what they themselves were hearing due to the differing boundary conditions).

Conversely, I can see a more 'technical' experiment in which a multitude of sources are placed at the instrument locations and the recordings compared, but then again...these sources would not be representative of the sources (the instruments).

Wow...how would you ascertain this? I guess this would have to come down to a body of recordings made under the two different boundary conditions. Maybe based upon that we could start to see trends etc in the recordings. There are the obvious assumptions, like the upper frequencies of the now-elevated instruments would be more clearly heard, but just how much of a difference this would make is anybody's guess. Finally, you say that the steps can be adjusted...so if you want yet another variable you can think about that one as well.

[Emil Sauer]

Actually I think the main reason that the play on risers are so they can hear each other better. They are very concerned about monitoring. There is also a huge reflector above the stage that can be lowered for the same cause and the musicians mainly use the Bang & Olufsen in-ears.

If you should do such an experiment, this concert hall would be ideal, because you easily can adjust the stage height. A binaural recording for this experiment would be preferred, because the most important thing, in my opinion, would be how the sound is affected at the audience seats. Not by measurement but through a listening panel.

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Emil Sauer

Actually I think the main reason that the play on risers are so they can hear each other better. They are very concerned about monitoring. There is also a huge reflector above the stage that can be lowered for the same cause and the musicians mainly use the Bang & Olufsen in-ears.

If you should do such an experiment, this concert hall would be ideal, because you easily can adjust the stage height. A binaural recording for this experiment would be preferred, because the most important thing, in my opinion, would be how the sound is affected at the audience seats. Not by measurement but through a listening panel.

Well, if I were in Denmark, I would propose such a test - seriously, I would. However, as we say in English, it is possible to "kill two birds with one stone" - I will explain in a bit.

I agree that listening tests would be extremely valuable, but they would have to be done in a very well-constructed and well-controlled double-blind way, and preferably with some minimum (at least) statistical controls. I have seen countless "listening tests" that people have executed and put faith in, only to discover that the listening test was flawed, often times from the start.

Believe me when I say this - juried tests (using sounds) is a pretty involved process, and careful consideration has to be given to things like the length of the files, the total time the listener is exposed to the sounds (once fatigue sets in, generally around 20 minutes, their repeatability goes right out the window) and the total number of files.

The listening tests could be either paired comparison ("which sound do you prefer? A, B, or no preference?") or they could be semantic differential. In the latter, the listeners are asked a question such as "please rate the following sounds, on a scale of 1 to 10, in terms of the degree of their [insert adjective here]".

In other words, in a semantic differential test, the listeners are asked to rate a given sound in terms of "musicality" or perhaps "realism" or any other facet of the sound that is to be investigated. Thus, the design of such a test is extremely critical, because even what you are asking about the sounds plays a role in the outcome - in addition to all the otehr things I mentioned before (length of the file, how many, etc).

Now, what would be most interesting...would be to sieze such an opportunity to do two things - first, locate multiple binaural heads in the house. Second, at each binaural head location, locate another type of microphone (perhaps ORTF, or maybe XY, etc). Yes, it's a lot of set up, but the data that could be produced and made available for listening tests is legion.

Mofreover, with such a set up in place, it would be idea to use the opportunity to place a point source on-stage so that a very short-lived burst of noise could be generated and thus, the impulse responses gathered for the various boundary conditions.

I for one would LOVE to see what, if any relationship exists between the preferred location for the recording and the impulse response at that same location. Likewise, two separate listening studies could be executed - one using headphones, and the other, with speakers.

It would be a huge undertaking, but I should think that it would be immensely entertaining as well as (hopefully) informative.

Now, if only I had:

a) money to burn
b) 6 or so binaural mannequins
c) The never-ending goodwill of the people of Denmark
d) a pre-paid airplane ticket and hotel accomodations
e) willing students to help run cables etc
f) the requisite juried analysis software with the requisite statistical and structural (i.e. Bradley-Terry) methodology
g) at least 30 'reliable' jurors (would need to start with at least 45 or so because typically, 50% of jurors in such studies are inconsistent in how they vote)

Hmmm...not much to ask at all. Seriously though, the hall is the PERFECT venue to undertake such a project, even if scaled down in scope.

[dallas simpson]

Hi Mark, and other interested binauralists,

Ok to brass tacks. There are a number of pre-requisites to popularising binaural.

We need full length binaural CONTENT! (not hosts of ideas, samples, fragments and experiments)
We need artists and production companies supporting the format.
We need programme comissioners asking for content in this format.
We need production facilities using this format.
We need mainstream national radio networks and record companies prepared to broadcst / release content in the binaural format.
We need radio / TV / Newspapers and Magazines popularising the format.

In the radio arena in the UK things get complicated.
Resonance 104.4 FM in central London will broadcast binaural without hesitation. They are particularly interested in 'art' content, musical or otherwise. Downside is they only broadcast to air in Central London and on the net, and have a local 'cult' following in Central London. As far as the rest of the UK is concerned it dosen't exist. Many of my binaural sound art works have been broadcast on this station, but have virtually no impact on the popularisation of binaural.

UK Local radio. Not really interested. Local BBC radio sees no need for binaural. My local station Radio Nottingham has broadcast fragments of my work in binaural, but as a 'novelty' item only.

National BBC. BBC Radio 4 (intelligent speech) broadcast The Dark House - an interactive binaural radio play about 4 years ago. They have done nothing since. BBC Radio 3 (non-mainstream classical) broadcast Enil's Saga from Fingal's Cave in binaural about 4 years ago - recorded by Mike Skeet ('bless him). Nothing binaural since.

Big problem in the BBC is that in-house and independent radio production companies can only supply what the broadcast comissioners ask for. Basically they don't ask for binaural and technically binaural is regarded as 'inappropriate' because of the phase components that do not resolve to pure mono, despite the fact that occasional binaural broadcasts have actually been put out by the BBC.

Commercial radio - only broadcast pop, rock, dance, trance.... and all popular genres of music. No interest in binaural.

For my part I'm currently engaged (once again) in trying to interest some independent radio production companies in the UK, and in house BBC production facilities, to create some binaural content (as I have been doing on and off for the last 15 years...) its a slow process. And so far without significant results.

Good Luck,
dallas.

[Mark A. Jay]

Dallas: Thanks for your input. All very useful stuff and some salient and concrete action items. Let me review this later as I am rather short on time this moment, but again, what you have written all makes sense.

Perhaps a next step to discuss these ideas might be to chat via skype...are you on skype? Would you be willing? I find the immediacy and real-time nature of skype very important in conveying more meaning.

Let me know.

Mark
PS: Anyone else with similar interests, I would love to converse with you as well, also via skype if possible.

[Peter Allison]

This thread has certainly got me very interested. In October this year, I have a friends concert to record. He is playing the organ in Durham Cathedral ( this is my main hobby), and the past 2 yrs have just used my handy Zoom H2, and a pair of PZM's, with very nice results considering the purchase price. But on talking with a friend of mine recently, found he used binaural way back in the 70's, I am thinking that I would like to do it again. The acoustic is typical of a gothic stone cathedral, and the organ there is one of the best examples in the UK. So will be looking for advice soon, or if there is anyone within traveling distance who wants to "have a go", no problems
peter

[dallas simpson]

Mike,

No I don't have skype. But I could set it up at work in my studio, perhaps next week. I'll let you know.

Peter - I'd love to be involved, studio work and other commitments permitting. Sounds great. Please let me know of the details, perhaps off list:

dallas (at) dallasmasters (dot) co (dot) uk

onwards and upwards...
D.

[boojum]

Too weird. I was just fiddling with my SONY MZ-RH1 and going through discs to see which had anything on them. The first one was the last binaural recording I made. Soundman OKM II's (I think) through a battery box to the RH1 of some wandering around, diesel trucks cruising by and a local farmers market. I will upload it to the PC and see what in there might be of interest.

I used the easiest and cheapest dummy of all to record with: myself. The OKM II's were in-ear. The problem is my head moving too much. But the sound is pretty good, being inside and outside my head as if it were a real event rather than a recorded one. I will do some work with it. And maybe I can come up with a way to use DPA 4061's in-ear. That would be good, too. There is a benefit concert tomorrow at the local events center with local bands rocking it to raise money for one band member's daughter's medical bills. An opportunity.

Thanks for priming the pump.

Cheers

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by peter the butche

This thread has certainly got me very interested. In October this year, I have a friends concert to record. He is playing the organ in Durham Cathedral ( this is my main hobby), and the past 2 yrs have just used my handy Zoom H2, and a pair of PZM's, with very nice results considering the purchase price. But on talking with a friend of mine recently, found he used binaural way back in the 70's, I am thinking that I would like to do it again. The acoustic is typical of a gothic stone cathedral, and the organ there is one of the best examples in the UK. So will be looking for advice soon, or if there is anyone within traveling distance who wants to "have a go", no problems
peter

While I wish I could help / be there, you're in good hands with Dallas (I am across the pond, and it has been a few years now since I visited you fair shores).

I don't know what the layout of the cathedra is relative to the pipes of the organ, but I had very good luck using a mannequin that was set up at the mid-point between the banks of pipes. Even though the space (especially in the church proper) is arguably more diffuse, I got (to my eras) a nice blend of the direct field (and thus left-to-right separation) as well as the decay.

Have a listen - I posted this excerpt a while back (use headphones for the best result):

Pipe organ recording again!! --video--

Oh, I also positioned another KU 100 at the back of the church (ear the choir loft) as the oragnist was curious to hear what a binaural recording in the very diffuse section of the cathedral soudned like - pretty much like what you might expect. That is, almost no left-to-right localization and a very amorphous sound. That doesn't make it 'bad', just different, and some who have heard the two prefer this (diffuse) to the other location (up by the altar) where there is more definition. It really boils down to what you are trying to accomplish.

Anyway, if you can take more than two channels' worth, then I would (i.e. mics in the direct as well as diffuse filed). That way, you can have two versions, or if you prefer, mix them to come up with a hybrid.

I guess it depends on your goal; pure binaural will be the most realistic, but realism may not be what you seek aesthetically - again though, I know Dallas understand the ins and outs, so I'm sure that he can help you achieve the desired result.

All the best...

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by dallas simpson

In the radio arena in the UK things get complicated.

Resonance 104.4 FM in central London will broadcast binaural without hesitation. They are particularly interested in 'art' content, musical or otherwise. Downside is they only broadcast to air in Central London and on the net, and have a local 'cult' following in Central London.

So, if I had some live tracks (or even entire concerts)...from concerts and had written permission from the artist(s), do you think they would be willing to broadcast them? I can see this as a great way for the band(s) to gain exposure as well as for the listeners to experience a show as if they had actually been there.

So?

Let me know...possibly off-thread if you think that is more apropos. - Mark

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by boojum

...And maybe I can come up with a way to use DPA 4061's in-ear. That would be good, too. There is a benefit concert tomorrow at the local events center with local bands rocking it to raise money for one band member's daughter's medical bills. An opportunity.

Thanks for priming the pump.

Cheers

Maybe the band would be cool with using your live version as a means of raising additional funds? That is, you donate your services for recording and fading / editing, and then give them the finished product.

This would allow those fans who were there to re-live the show, and for those who could not make it, to experience it as if they had been there. As it's a benefit you might find a lot of people willing to contribute (and get the recording) who otehrwise may not. Of course, the music would basically have to be public domain or originals by the band proper, but you get the idea.

As far as the mechanism for the exchange, it could be as simple as allowing access to an FTP site or something like that. The band could even promote it at the show.

Just a thought...

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by dallas simpson

Mike,

No I don't have skype. But I could set it up at work in my studio, perhaps next week. I'll let you know.

Dallas: my skype ID is mark.a.jay

Incidentally, anyone else reading this thread with an interest in binaural can certainly feel free to add my name to their skype contact list.

[Emil Sauer]

Is there anyone who has an idea of how many albums recorded fully binaural or with some binaural tracks mixed in, that is available on the market?
For instance which of the Tchad Blake albums has binaural elements in them?

To narrow down lets say only the ones where you clearly can hear a 3D feel on headphones.

It would be nice to have a complete discography of all the best binaural publishings to refer to, when trying to promote the binaural idea.

[Henry Olonga]

Try the stuff by Zucarelli. All the Pink Floyd stuff essentially. Final cut and Roger Waters - the pros and cons. Very immersive. Hate to say that after a while it does become a bit of a gimick to have clocks, ducks,dogs and cars wizzing around your head but all the same it is amazing.

I have made a few myself. Recorded to DSD at 5.6 mhz. It sounds like you are there I swear listening to the high res masters. I was messing around and stuck a few on my blog.

Binaural headphone recordings. | Henry Olonga's Website

Try some of these

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Henry Olonga

Try the stuff by Zucarelli. All the Pink Floyd stuff essentially. Final cut and Roger Waters - the pros and cons. Very immersive. Hate to say that after a while it does become a bit of a gimick to have clocks, ducks,dogs and cars wizzing around your head but all the same it is amazing.

I have made a few myself. Recorded to DSD at 5.6 mhz. It sounds like you are there I swear listening to the high res masters. I was messing around and stuck a few on my blog.

Binaural headphone recordings. | Henry Olonga's Website

Try some of these

Henry: I visited the site - nice work. I'd like to speak with you some time about the DSD process as I have yet to actually record something using that method.

As far as Zuccarelli's claims though, having read the patents the conclusions that I came to is that "Ringo" is essentially a binaural head - no more, no less. That's not meant to be a derisive comment, because I am obviously a huge proponent of binaural. I do, however, have an issue what what Zuccarelli claimed (back in the early 1980's) as novel, because I truly don't see it as such. To my knowledge, no other reasearchers have come to the same conclusion as has Zuccarelli.

Having worked in signal processing since the 1990's (and having worked with binaural since then right up to present day), I find it strange that Zuccarelli's system, if indeed, more spatially-accurate than binaural, would not have become entrenced in R&D facilities (ISVR, M.I.T., et al). It hasn't. In fact, binaural mannequins have become the de-facto standard for recording and of equal import, studying spatially-correct audio.

Anyway, another person brought Zuccarelli's technique to my attention and so I spent a fair amount of time searching for the patents, found and read the U.S. patent, and discovered that nowhere in the patent does Zuccarelli explain how the principle of oto-emissions (noise generated by the ear, which is essentially the claimed 'backbone' of Holophonics and what makes it purportedly different than binaural) actually functions as an interferometer. Interferometry is basically the principle by which holograms are made, thus the name 'Holophonics'. What Zuccarelli claims is that it is the ear acting as an interferometer and not the ITD or ILD and HRTF that allows us to localize. It would seem that were this principle true (acoustic interferometry), then provisions for its implementation would be in the patent, but it isn't. It's hinted at, but never documented.

As you can see from the patent (see link below), "Ringo" comprises a mannequin head, pinna outer ears), ear canals (the meatus), and mated to these ear canals, pressure transducers. This is the same approach that every mannequin head manufacturer uses, be it Neumann, Cortex, Head Acoustics, Bruel & Kjaer, or KEMAR. The only heads that differ from this approach (that I know of) are the AGK D-99 (AKA Harry).

From what I have read, it's been difficult to get Zuccarelli to discuss the particulars of the system or to have it measured (i.e. HRTF, impulse response etc).

I summarized the Zuccarelli patent here: holophonic vs. binaural

Anyway, my guess is that Zuccarelli made a splash with some good samples that hyper-illustrate the spatial attributes (most of which have significant high-frequency energy, which would tend to better localize than low frequency content), but note that a lot of them are based on effects happening very close to the head. These were all the more impressive for all who had never heard binaural mannequin-based recordings.

On a related note, check out the March 2010 edition of "Physics Today" for an article entitled "Diffraction around the head makes hearers mislocate sound sources" pertaining to work by Hartmann (of Michigan State University).

There's been additional work that also suggests that a lot of the 'lack of spatialization' for binaural (in some cases) is really not the fault of binaural at al, but rather, due to the brain falling back upon visual cues when the ITD / ILD are not enough to ascertain the true direction. The guess is that rather than give an ambiguous cue as to where something may be located when directly in front, the ears 'take a back seat' to the eyes, and then involuntarily, we turn our heads slightly to force the ITD to change and thus confirm what our visions is telling us.

The classic example of this is a sound directly in front and at a distance, with few if any reflections; localization is very diffficult in such circumstances. However, as that sourec-to-head distance gets smaller, the change in path length and the dffraction caused by the head itself (ours or that of a mannequin) plays a big role in how we localize.

Anyway, Dallas made some salient points about advancing the binaural cause in media. I think he is right in that we have to essentially soft-sell media (radio and such) on things that are both interesting (aurally) as well as content-wise for their listeners. Radio is changing (as has the music business), and it makes me wonder if really what is needed is a sort of website that caters to spatially-accurate sound. Maybe this may be a way to reach more potential listeners.

I can see something like a categorized website, that is:

* binaural mannequin-based recordings
* in-ear / on head binaural recordings
* quasi-binaural (i.e. jeklin dis, S.A.S.S.)

And each one of these would have the music genre / artist, or probably better, the artist / genre higher up in the tree as that first grab of a poerson's attention is the toughest. Some of the stuff that Dallas has worked on (for example) falls into a few different categories (and also for me) so categorzation may not be that straight-forward.

What would REALLY help promote spatial audio would be for a few 'flag-bearer' / 'poster-boy' artists to help champion the cause. I really don't know.

What I do know is that like all of you, when people unacquainted with binaural (and whose paradigms of sound are based on multi-channel mixes for speakers) hear pretty much any of my recordings, they are shocked by the accuracy... I guess that's the big stumbling block - forcing that paradigm (the idea that sound over speakers is natural, because it isn't) to be broken or at least strained is a tall order.

[Henry Olonga]

Great post Mark.

I have been in touch with Zuccarelli a number of times. He is the most secretive guy imaginable - and the patent has expired I think. His stuff is different from normal binaural though I am sure. You can see it on a phase scope. He speaks about emitting a high frequency pitched sound and that then causes the interference pattern like a hologram. Bla bla bla. Not sure whether ringo actually does that but that is his claim. Anyway he has moved onto making speakers now which apparentlky have some amazing properties so he is a bright guy. Massenburg joked at a meet once that he is the only guy to nick a preamp off him LOL ha ha

He used to study bats apparently so you are right about the high frequency obervations.

Anyway - I have a home made dummy head - cost me about 20 bucks to make and some very high quality omnis, amazing preamp and recorded to the DSD recorders it is IMHO better than what Hugo achieved. The bandwith of 5.6 mhz DSD means you can close your eyes and BE THERE.

I have fooled myself a number of times actually - I was working on something I had recorded and said pardon to my wife and she said, I didn't say anything - DOH! It was on the recording but it sounded 100 % real.

[Mark A. Jay]

Originally Posted by Henry Olonga

Great post Mark.

I have been in touch with Zuccarelli a number of times. He is the most secretive guy imaginable - and the patent has expired I think. His stuff is different from normal binaural though I am sure. You can see it on a phase scope. He speaks about emitting a high frequency pitched sound and that then causes the interference pattern like a hologram. Bla bla bla. Not sure whether ringo actually does that but that is his claim. Anyway he has moved onto making speakers now which apparentlky have some amazing properties so he is a bright guy. Massenburg joked at a meet once that he is the only guy to nick a preamp off him LOL ha ha

He used to study bats apparently so you are right about the high frequency obervations.

Anyway - I have a home made dummy head - cost me about 20 bucks to make and some very high quality omnis, amazing preamp and recorded to the DSD recorders it is IMHO better than what Hugo achieved. The bandwith of 5.6 mhz DSD means you can close your eyes and BE THERE.

I have fooled myself a number of times actually - I was working on something I had recorded and said pardon to my wife and she said, I didn't say anything - DOH! It was on the recording but it sounded 100 % real.

Well...one way to ascertain the differences, as I mentioned, would be to start with (as a basis) a controlled gtest wherein the HRTFs are measured as a function of space, and compare these to other binaural techniques. As I mentioned in another post, one thing that could make Holophonics differ from binaural (IMO) is the actual geometry to the ear canals. In the patent they speak to the geometry of the ear canals, and it sounds like it might be variable. Of course, if you truly wanted to describe the system (any system, not just Zuccarelli's) then the impulse response would answer that query...and of course, having the impulse response opens the door to convolution and thus, synthesis.

Still, that makes it binaural that relies upon pressure transducers and not an active localization technique (i.e. "Ringo" does not emit a stimulus or a carrier to cause this interference pattern). Again, that's my issue with Zuccarelli. Had he simply said that the technique was binaural with some tweaks, I would have no problem with his approach. I simply feel that to allude to a novel approach (i.e. active sensing) while never demonstrating it is tantamount to false advertising. Sure, all advertising is, in a way, creative deception. Again, none of his claims have been borne out by well-respected bastions of research, and the fact that still, binaural mannequins are de-factor for perceptual research says a lot (to me) about the validity of the approach.

As for making your own head...bravo! I say that in all sincerity and I really wish that more people would do that (and maybe this is a means by which binaural can gain more acceptance by those familiar with traditional recording and transducers, but not well-acquainted with binaural)

In fact...maybe that would be a great new thread:

What if we created a thread here that contained ONLY recordings made with home-brewed mannequin heads?

I think that would increase the comfort factor with the topic, garner some enthusiasm, and probably promote a good dialogue along the lines of "this (approach / modification 'x') worked well for me - here are some samples and so on".

Do you all agree that such a topic / theme could be a stand-alone thread?

I would not be able to (yet) contribute as I am working on my prototypes now, and I am a ways away before completing them.

Anyway, I get a lot of email and private messages asking "should I try to build one of my own like the guy in the digga DIY mannequin head post did" and I always answer with a resound "YES!" you should. So, I applaud you for what you and othders like you who have crafted their own mannequins have done. Excellent work.

One thing that also plays a huge role in the perception is the type and quality (of course) of the headphones. Some of the binaural stuff that I have measured sounds uber-realistic when I play it on my STAX electrostatic phones, and not quite as realistic on a pair of closed-back phones. Of course, in principle, one could convolve one into the other (though I have not as of yet tried it - it's a thought experiment for me at this point), but the differences between the STAX open-back electrostats (for me, akin to acoustic nirvana) and other phones is very significant. Then again, a pair of STAX and the requisite electronics is the cost of a very good pair of loudspeakers, and thus, a very tough sell to nearly all of the consumer market.

On the subject of localization, a colleague sent this link to me: Is it possible? Real life Batman. [VIDEO]

I like it because of a few reasons, but in principle, the 'click' (like what dolphins and bats do) is of course the starting point to determining a great many things about a causal system. The Fourier transform of a click (i.e. a delta function) is of course a flat power spectrum and a corollary of this is the kroneker (sp?) impulse function used in digital systems (as a stimulus) to derive their impulse response.

The other reason I like the video is, quite simply, that here's an example of a person who has overcome a set-back in life, found a way to compensate, and thus, opened his 'auditory eyes' to the beauty of the world around him, as well as allow him to lead what is arguably a fairly normal life. To me, that's downright uplifting.

Oh...one last thing... though I have not used DSD...as an electrical engineer, it makes complete and total sense to me. In fact, I would guess that having such a high sample rate is far more important than 24 bit versus 16. I know - there are many caveats here, and I probably should not generalize, but knowing what I know about digital signal processing (which isn't much compared to experts in the field) makes me think that it would allow for smooth reconstruction of sinusoidal components up to 20 kHz without having to use any sort of interpolation in the D/A process. Just my opinion.