[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Sonic Studio's DSM technology is, I beleive, the next generation of biaural recording. Check out their samples:http://www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm

Thanks for the link. I'm always interested in attempts to make binaural recording practical commercially. Obviously if you can encode 360-degree space in only 2 channels instead of 5 or 7 or more, you've got an advantage.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose 1. Sounds very weird on speakers

Not necessarily. Try it. Depends on how deep they cram the mics into the dummy head. Sennheiser showed that it wasn't necessary to put the mics in the ear canal. Recordings I've made sound just fine on speakers. In fact, I've never heard a binaural recording that sounded great on 'phones and lousy on speakers. A binaural recording is not that much different from a Jecklin Disc recording or even an ORTF-type recording.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose 2. Requires special IEM headphones that is not equalized according to HRTF to sound its best.

Eh? You can get very nice binaural effects with just about any kind of headphone, although experience has taught me that open-backed 'phones are better. Based on that, I'd expect IEMs would be the worst, not the best.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Biaural recording has weird frequency response when heard on 99.9% of headphones out there.

Eh? Who says? If a binaural recording gives a "weird" FR, it's a good kind of "weird".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose 3. Hard to create the exact ambient effects in a another recording session. The recording pretty much has to be finished in one setting.

Now here I agree. Mixing two environments to make a multitracked production, for example, would be very tricky without some digital help. Of course it depends on the project, but yes, binaural tracks can't be manipulated and interleaved like mono studio tracks. Not yet.

It's easy to make your own binaural recordings and test all these assertions but mostly to have a blast. All you need is an iPod that records and a couple of miniature tietack mics. Strap the mics to your ears and.. whuzzat? iPods don't record? Well, what good are they then? So get a MiniDisc portable with mic inputs, or an old DAT or even an old portable cassette machine and have at it. Record Your World.

 

[003]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Sonic Studio's DSM technology is, I beleive, the next generation of biaural recording. Check out their samples:http://www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm Traditional biaural recording (using omnidirectional mics inside dummy head's dummy ears) is only suitable for personal/amateur projects and has been proven to be a commercial dead-end. It has major problems: 1. Sounds very weird on speakers 2. Requires special IEM headphones that is not equalized according to HRTF to sound its best. I think Etymonics made one called ER-4B. Biaural recording has weird frequency response when heard on 99.9% of headphones out there. 3. Hard to create the exact ambient effects in a another recording session. The recording pretty much has to be finished in one setting. Sonic Solution's DSM seems to have solved the first two problems.

That stuff sounds pretty good -- much better than traditional stereo. However I think the soundstage on the original recording posted is noticeably bigger.

 

[SonicDawg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta It's easy to make your own binaural recordings and test all these assertions but mostly to have a blast. All you need is an iPod that records and a couple of miniature tietack mics. Strap the mics to your ears and.. whuzzat? iPods don't record? Well, what good are they then? So get a MiniDisc portable with mic inputs, or an old DAT or even an old portable cassette machine and have at it. Record Your World.

*cough*Iriver*cough*

 

[Ferbose]

It really depends on where the mic is placed in the first place.
If the mic is deep inside a fake ear on a dummy head, then you need to play it back on IEMs with special equalization. Look at the IEMs measured by Headroom. They all have non-flat frequency response (FR) above 2 kHz to compensate for HRTF (head-related transfer function). For in-ear biaural recording, what the mic picks up is aleady shaped by HRTF, so playing it on any headphone equalized to some kind of HRTF, which is basically every heapdhone we discuss here, would screw up the FR in treble. AFAIK, putting omni mics deep inside the ear and playing back using special headphones is the best biaural method, but totally imcompatible with consumer products.

Biaural recording mics could be placed right outside the ear, or on a dummy head without the ear, and then playback on circumaural headphones would be the best. There is no standard on how biaural recording is done, and thereore no standard on how to properly playback. There simply is not enough market for standarized biaural technology. Biaural recordings may be great for spatial cues, but I have complaints about their tonality. The issue with tonality may very well be an FR problem. Also, bass is amazing on biaural recordings.

 

[Sunr]

Wow, that was a very intimate listen.

Here's another one, click on the "Fireworks, Northampton Balloon Festival" for a Fireworks Bonanza, you can hear the depth. perfect for the upcoming fireworks show.(US)

http://www.dallasmasters.co.uk/dalla...ormances.shtml

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta T In fact, I've never heard a binaural recording that sounded great on 'phones and lousy on speakers. A binaural recording is not that much different from a Jecklin Disc recording or even an ORTF-type recording.

Point me to one commercially released biaural recording that does not sound weird on speakers and gets instrument tonality correct, and I will buy it instantly. I have been looking for this kind of stuff.

 

[003]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Point me to one commercially released biaural recording that does not sound weird on speakers and gets instrument tonality correct

Who cares what they sound like on speakers, this is head-fi!

 

[ozshadow]

Without an amp, it was nothing special. Through a simple A47, it became quite amazing. Who says Grado's do not have soundstage ? pssh

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicDawg *cough*Iriver*cough*

So cough up the model number, why doncha? Which Iriver can record in high-bitrate stereo without an external mic preamp? I'm terribly ignorant; educate me, please.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferbose Point me to one commercially released biaural recording that does not sound weird on speakers and gets instrument tonality correct...

I rather think the burden of proof is on the original plaintiff (you) to point us to a commercially released binaural recording that we would judge sounds "weird" on our speakers and gets instrument tonality all wrong. I've never heard one, but I never said it couldn't be done with hard work and a computer.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose ...AFAIK, putting omni mics deep inside the ear and playing back using special headphones is the best biaural method, but totally imcompatible with consumer products.

Here, specifically, you won't get any disagreement from me, since I've always believed that a binaural mic should be placed so that its diaphragm is where the reproducing headphone's diaphragm is going to be. For practical recordings, this means at the entrance to the ear canal but not blocking it or any part of the pinna, and you mention something like this yourself a little further down. I don't agree with the folks who think the mic's diaphragm should subsitute for the recording head's eardrum; that's not what I'd call "best". Not for a practical recording, anyway. Which is not to say that a recording made that way will necessarily sound bad. Has anyone heard and passed judgment on the ZBS Media production of Stephen King's The Mist, a CD of which any good library will have?


Quote:

Originally Posted by ferbose I have complaints about their tonality. The issue with tonality may very well be an FR problem.

Almost by definition, yes. Now, without getting off into a discussion on the commercial viability of binaural recording, which is a whole 'nother topic, it could be argued, and it can be shown, that the comb-filtering effect of room reflections does violence to any instrument (or voice or noise) recorded normally, that is, with a mic on a stand in front of the performer. In other words, we should be objecting to any recording made with any other method than direct or contact pickups all fed to single tracks on a multitrack recorder. But we don't. Our ear-brain compensates for room sound. Likewise with the binaural track offered in the first post. We don't know how it was recorded (well, somebody does, but I'm wallowing in my own ignorance for the sheer fun of it), yet most folks-- not all-- are enjoying it with all the characteristic wow! reactions good binaural recordings elicit.

I maintain only that if people will make their own (that is, personal, amateur) binaural recordings, they won't have the problems you originally outlined, and it may very well be because they haven't stuffed mics up their ear canals.

Pearl Jam's sometime producer, Tchad Blake, likes to slip in binaurally recorded tracks in his commercial releases. Try searching for <"tchad blake"> <binaurally> in Google. Here's one hit.

 

[SonicDawg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta So cough up the model number, why doncha? Which Iriver can record in high-bitrate stereo without an external mic preamp? I'm terribly ignorant; educate me, please.

Well, of course the H100 series will need an external mic and preamp to REALLY record, however, with its optical in it is possible, unlike any other DAPs out there. The H100 series is the only line of models possible.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferbose Point me to one commercially released biaural recording that does not sound weird on speakers and gets instrument tonality correct, and I will buy it instantly. I have been looking for this kind of stuff.

Here is the link.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonicDawg Well, of course the H100 series will need an external mic and preamp to REALLY record, however, with its optical in it is possible, unlike any other DAPs out there. The H100 series is the only line of models possible.

Thank you. I wasn't kidding about being ignorant about the most recent generations of DAPs. In googling around to get myself a bit more hip I found that Iriver did make, and has stopped making (!!), a useful line of recording DAPs with mic input, selectable bitrates and just about everything you need except a rec-level meter. But that's not bad, especially in something so small. And the short recording time at the high bitrate isn't as much of a limitation as it might seem, especially if a laptop is waiting not far away. Apparently the ones to get are/were the IFP-899 and IFP-799. They were popular for podcasting and even doing audio for location video. And here's a guy complaining how hard it is to set up for recording, but he goes through all the steps so you can do it too.

I'm going to see if I can snag one of these little devils cheap. The quality isn't topnotch but it'll capture the binaural effect.

Anyone know of anything that replaces the Iriver IFP-7xx and IFP-8xx?

 

[John Buchanan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by VR6ofpain This is just insane. Too slick. Though I am starting to think my K81DJ's have a slight channel imbalance to the right side. When he was supposed to be in the front middle, it sounded like he was slightly closer to the right side.

The first time Gunther speaks in front of the head, it images slightly to the right. When he is behind the head, it is centralised. With Sabine whispering in your ear, who cares!! Your headphones are correctly imaging. Gunther was probably looking at Sabine and drooling.
This is one of the tracks from the Stax Space Sound CD. The first time I heard this (when the Lambda Signatures were first released) I asked the salesman to turn off the guitar also playing in the room. Never had I been even close to fooled before. The second track where Marianne puts on a shower cap and gets in the shower is absolutely real sounding - the water hitting the shower cap really makes you duck. My copy of this CD is going with me to the grave. They come up on Ebay Germany regularly.

 

[SonicDawg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta Thank you. I wasn't kidding about being ignorant about the most recent generations of DAPs. In googling around to get myself a bit more hip I found that Iriver did make, and has stopped making (!!), a useful line of recording DAPs with mic input, selectable bitrates and just about everything you need except a rec-level meter. But that's not bad, especially in something so small. And the short recording time at the high bitrate isn't as much of a limitation as it might seem, especially if a laptop is waiting not far away. Apparently the ones to get are/were the IFP-899 and IFP-799. They were popular for podcasting and even doing audio for location video. And here's a guy complaining how hard it is to set up for recording, but he goes through all the steps so you can do it too. I'm going to see if I can snag one of these little devils cheap. The quality isn't topnotch but it'll capture the binaural effect. Anyone know of anything that replaces the Iriver IFP-7xx and IFP-8xx?

Well, with H140 or H120 you can record a lot longer, and with a third party firmware such as Rockbox you can record directly into wav files, not to mention the recording patch that further enhances its recording capacity. I don't do live recording myself, but give it a try!