No, I have my own recordings and this one:
I don’t get externalization with them. They immediately collapse.
Lack of "externalization" is a typical binaural problem.
Please don’t be angry with me.
I am not saying binaural is the right technique in the current scheme of things. It demands a really specific playback environment (externalization with convolution of personal binaural head impulse responses, crosstalk cancellation and head tracking).
But it is an option as far as immersive audio is concerned.
I still believe a) objects + personal binaural synthesis (computing intensive) or b) high order ambisonics + personal binaural convolution are better than fixed binaural content.
It is just that I don’t have the right instruments to test it myself so I can’t discard binaural immediately.
Application of personalized HRTF to a generic recording is anything but simple, and while technically possible, even less practical than plain old binaural recordings.
I just don't see binaural, in any form, ever capturing more than a small niche. It follows the profile of all immersive audio-only methods in that way, possibly a bit worse off. Remember, Quad/4-channel failed (market confusion, multiple incompatible formats, and a rather difficult demand for speaker/listener placement and gear). 5.1 music has never gained traction, even though there are millions of well-suited pre-installed home audio systems capable of playback. Binaural demands less from the listener in terms of equipment, just the right headphones, but then doesn't work well very often, and even when it does it's not applicable to many recordings. If you place another demand on the listener (full HRTF impulse response profiling, for example) it will just go ignored except, again, for the hard-core niche.
For anything to rapidly and fully penetrate the market it must offer a 3-5-fold perceived improvement over it's proceeding competition. That's easy when there is no predecessor, but binaural has very strong, very well established proceeding competition. As an example of the 3-5-fold improvement winning, CDs did that offering quality, durability, recording time, size, and handling advantages. Stereo did that over mono. But binaural doesn't even offer perceived improvement for all listeners, cannot be heard on speakers (easily), and is limited in application to specific recording and music types and styles. Those combined with the other limitations place it in a negative perceived improvement position, a position which never wins any markets to speak of.