Has anyone used any surround virtualization software/ audio enhancement software?

[Eurobeat]

Hello all,

I originally was looking to get "surround sound headphones," and it seems "Virtual Surround Sound" is what I was looking for.

Another user was asking a question about them too, and I ended up finding virtualization software, and curious if anyone has messed with these/heard of these programs?


http://www.razerzone.com/surround

and

http://software.store.creative.com/p/software/sound-blaster-x-fi-mb3

http://www.creative.com/oem/products/software/x-fimb3.asp


Some people like the Creative solution better, some like the razor solution better, so I need to get more information about them, hopefully, without buying them both...

It's a shame that they cost money (razor has a free version), but I wish there were trials.  Razor apparently was free a few years ago, but now is 20$.  Creative I heard was originally 10$, but costs 30$ now, which I am assuming is due to better features.

One comment was that most "onboard" motherboard audio is "good enough" and the "software" is the most important part.

It's a shame I didn't see these applications the last time I looked up Surround Sound Headphones, or in general for years without my Creative software that game with my X-Fi Elite Pro Soundcard .



EDIT:  I was also told

Look into Out Of Your Head, beyerdynamic Virtual Studio, TB Isone, and Redline Monitor. 

It seems "Our of your Head" was created by a member here, and I'm curious about the others, and how they compare....

It seems there are more options than I thought...  But 150$ for the Out Of your Head?  wow....

 

[cel4145]

Razer still has a free version. Look at the differences:

http://www.razerzone.com/surround#product_specs

(scroll down)

The paid version offers individual customization EQ. You can experience the virtual surround capability with the free version.

 

[Eurobeat]

Razer still has a free version. Look at the differences:

http://www.razerzone.com/surround#product_specs

(scroll down)

The paid version offers individual customization EQ. You can experience the virtual surround capability with the free version.

Thanks, I kind of skim,med through them before I passed out last night.  It semed the free version had significantly less features thant he paid.

I'm actually pretty interested in the "Out of your Head" software, but will have to read up reviews on it, and compare to the others .  150$ is a lot of money for something like this, but if it can make the sound that much mkore amazing then....

 

[cel4145]

Yeah. The very first sentence of Out of Your Head's description turns me away:

"Out Of Your Head is advanced audio software that replicates the experience of listening to high-end speakers using only headphones."

Headphones can't emulate the soundstage of a decent speaker setup. Just not possible. So when a product has to begin with a blatantly false claim, I ignore it.

 

[Eurobeat]

Yeah. The very first sentence of Out of Your Head's description turns me away:

"Out Of Your Head is advanced audio software that replicates the experience of listening to high-end speakers using only headphones."

Headphones can't emulate the soundstage of a decent speaker setup. Just not possible. So when a product has to begin with a blatantly false claim, I ignore it.

Well, I'm not sure exactly how it works, but it seems to emulate the sound based on math to make it appear as if the sound was be created through speakers.

Some thing's in the fact mention a few things.


 

 

There’s already lots of “virtual surround” processors and headphones out there, isn’t this just the same thing?

No, absolutely not. All the existing technology like Dolby Headphone and other virtual surround processors synthesize or create effects that can give the illusion of the sound coming from around your head. But they are simply simulated. Out Of Your Head uses actual measurements from real speakers and real rooms. It’s like a video game vs. reality. A video game is computer generated. None of it is real. Out Of Your Head is not creating the sound of speakers and rooms, it’s “playing back” the measurements done in a real room with real speakers.

I thought this next one was funny, but who knows.
Quote:

 

I listened to the trial, but it just sounded strange and I didn’t get any effect at all.

The first time you hear Out Of Your Head, it may not sound right. It’s not the software, it’s your brain!

The problem is that your brain doesn’t know what it’s hearing. Generally if you are sitting at your laptop or desktop computer, the sound will sound like it’s coming from behind a wall or out in the middle of the room, etc. Since your eyes don’t see anything that the sound could be coming from, your brain gets confused.

So to help “train your brain” to ignore what you’re seeing and actually hear what you’re hearing, try some of these tips.

1. I know this sounds strange, but if there’s any way you can have a pair of speakers out in front of you when you first listen to it, that can really help with your brain figuring out what it’s hearing. When your eyes see an actual pair of speakers, your brain says, “Oh OK, the sound is coming from the speakers.” Without any speakers, it takes a while for your brain to figure out that the sound is coming from the middle of a room or from behind the wall in front of you, etc.
2. If you don’t have any speakers handy, another good way of “calibrating your brain” is to use the “mute” buttons. In the Out Of Your Head control panel interface, there is a speaker icon at the bottom next to each channel. For two channel music, click on the Left or Right channel speaker icon to mute that channel. You brain has a much easier time localizing the sound source of just one speaker rather than two. Then once you hear the location of one speaker, you can turn on the other speaker and you might have an easier time recognizing what you are hearing.
3. The very last effect at the bottom of the list is “bypass”. Scroll down and click on the bypass so you can hear the sound fed straight through without any effect. Then when you switch back to a speaker preset, you will hear a dramatic difference in the sound and you should hear the image move from inside your head to out in front of you.
4. Finally, if all else fails, just close your eyes. Let your ears interpret the sound without your eyes confusing your ears.

Eventually you will get used to it and be able to hear where all of the speakers are in the room.

From their comments in the first quote, as well as their "presets" it seems to take the sound that is produced by these high end speakers, and plays it onto your headphones, as if they were the speakers.  So they are just taking the sound that's been recorded by these speakers in high quality rooms, with tons of tests, and they get everything needed and just force that onto headphones.  So you're getting the sound as if they were coming from a 30000$ speaker.  Will it sound the same?  That's TBD by those who actually have those expensive speakers.

Also, they mentioned that high quality songs have to be downsampled to 48khz, because high-res would take up too  much "CPU Usage..."

 

[Armaegis]

Here's another free one to try: http://www.toneboosters.com/tb-isone/
I've been using it for years.

 

[RRod]

Yeah. The very first sentence of Out of Your Head's description turns me away:

"Out Of Your Head is advanced audio software that replicates the experience of listening to high-end speakers using only headphones."

Headphones can't emulate the soundstage of a decent speaker setup. Just not possible. So when a product has to begin with a blatantly false claim, I ignore it.

 
One can certainly combine impulse response measurements of a room with those of a set of speakers to get a set of filters than can simulate the setup. Not that this is easy ^_^ But you also technically need to account for the user's headphone response as well, or at least have some inverse filter for an ideal headphone response. The page for the software is a little low on these details. But they at least offer a trial, and it would certainly be possible to use that trial to test some tracks (like Dolby's surround test tracks) to see how it does with virtual placement for one's own setup.

 

[RRod]

 

Also, they mentioned that high quality songs have to be downsampled to 48khz, because high-res would take up too  much "CPU Usage.

 
If it's doing on-the-fly convolution, then you could certainly run into issues with fatter files. Note I haven't used this stuff; just been doing reading on headphone virtualization lately.

 

[Eurobeat]

  Here's another free one to try: http://www.toneboosters.com/tb-isone/
I've been using it for years.

Thanks, I believe I also saw prices on somethings, so not sure what's free, and what's not.  How do you like it since you've been using it for a long time?
 

   
One can certainly combine impulse response measurements of a room with those of a set of speakers to get a set of filters than can simulate the setup. Not that this is easy ^_^ But you also technically need to account for the user's headphone response as well, or at least have some inverse filter for an ideal headphone response. The page for the software is a little low on these details. But they at least offer a trial, and it would certainly be possible to use that trial to test some tracks (like Dolby's surround test tracks) to see how it does with virtual placement for one's own setup.

There is some info here and there, and the fact has a little (which I mentioned), but it seems like you just need to try it out, and see how it goes.  I doubt they want to give away how it's done (just in case people try to replicate it), but it sounds like an interesting idea.
 

   
If it's doing on-the-fly convolution, then you could certainly run into issues with fatter files. Note I haven't used this stuff; just been doing reading on headphone virtualization lately.

It's just odd that current computers couldn't handle it.


I'm not sure if it's a bad thing that htey are are downsampled to 48khz, is that going to kill the sound?  What rates are high quality samples?  I think I've seen 192khz?  Thats' a HUGE difference....  (4 times larger).

There are a lot of choices it seems, but only a few have "trials."

One user said the Creative/Razor software were "entry-level," which is surprising seeing as Creative is such a powerhouse with Audio, but I guess their market is the "gamer" and not "audiophiles."

 

[cel4145]

Well, I'm not sure exactly how it works, but it seems to emulate the sound based on math to make it appear as if the sound was be created through speakers.

I'm not going to read the explanation for an untenable claim that would require violating the laws of physics.

Could people like the software? Sure. Just don't spend your money based on the idea that his software does what he says it can do.

 

[RRod]

  There is some info here and there, and the fact has a little (which I mentioned), but it seems like you just need to try it out, and see how it goes.  I doubt they want to give away how it's done (just in case people try to replicate it), but it sounds like an interesting idea.
 
It's just odd that current computers couldn't handle it.


I'm not sure if it's a bad thing that htey are are downsampled to 48khz, is that going to kill the sound?  What rates are high quality samples?  I think I've seen 192khz?  Thats' a HUGE difference....  (4 times larger).

There are a lot of choices it seems, but only a few have "trials."

One user said the Creative/Razor software were "entry-level," which is surprising seeing as Creative is such a powerhouse with Audio, but I guess their market is the "gamer" and not "audiophiles."

 
How it's done isn't a secret thing, it's just not a trivial thing to do (even just the part about taking measurements of the rooms to simulate). As far as the computation, the trick is having to do it in real-time while also keeping the audio synced with the video. You can search the forums (esp. Sound Science) for thoughts on higher sampling rates; it's the kind of discussion that gets heated, so probably best to avoid it here 

 
As far as Creative, read a bit about the time when Aureal was giving them a run for the money. I wouldn't call Creative's stuff "entry level", but it isn't the Smyth Realiser either.

 

[Armaegis]

 
Thanks, I believe I also saw prices on somethings, so not sure what's free, and what's not.  How do you like it since you've been using it for a long time?
 

 
Unless things have changed, most of his plugins are free but you can't save any setting unless you have the paid version.

 

[cskippy]

Just a note about the Out of Your Head software; there is a pretty significant audio delay due to the processing required on the audio.  So if you are using it with video games or movies there will be audio delay which might bother you.

 

[Eurobeat]

  Just a note about the Out of Your Head software; there is a pretty significant audio delay due to the processing required on the audio.  So if you are using it with video games or movies there will be audio delay which might bother you.

Thanks for the info...  I'm assuming the delay doesn't affect the music itself, just starts a few seconds after it should, and flows evenly through?

 

[Eurobeat]

   
How it's done isn't a secret thing, it's just not a trivial thing to do (even just the part about taking measurements of the rooms to simulate). As far as the computation, the trick is having to do it in real-time while also keeping the audio synced with the video. You can search the forums (esp. Sound Science) for thoughts on higher sampling rates; it's the kind of discussion that gets heated, so probably best to avoid it here 

 
As far as Creative, read a bit about the time when Aureal was giving them a run for the money. I wouldn't call Creative's stuff "entry level", but it isn't the Smyth Realiser either.

For sure, I was just saying that they are probably vague so they don't give away anything, even if it's not that hard for some to figure out, it still takes time.

It's all very interesting.

I'll check out the info on Aureal, but it seems that these other "enhancements" are going to be better than the Razor/Creative suites.

Which one is the one I'll go with?  Not too sure..

Out Of Head sounds interesting, but at the same time has a lot of drawbacks.
 

   
Unless things have changed, most of his plugins are free but you can't save any setting unless you have the paid version.