Separate names with a comma.
Not my thing, I'm more comfortable being a fox rather than a hedgehog.
I'm the elephant in the corner!
I gave my best trying to describe the theories. But I also think it's a very complex blend of lots and lots of things.
So this is definitely something to be tested experimentally and not to be endorsed or refuted theoretically.
So being skeptical if will even work before experimentation is not being neutral.
Tonight I decided to go to Amazon and search for binaural recordings of music to see what all these folks recommending binaural are listening to.... Do you guys all REALLY listen to self hypnosis CDs all day? What the heck are you guys talking about?! What are you basing your glowing opinions of binaural recording techniques on? Do you really have "Stop Your Drug Addiction Binaural Beats", "Emotional Trauma Release" and "Raise Your Vibrational Frequency" in your CD collection? Man! What a load of horse droppings. Why am I wasting my time seriously discussing a total fraud?
Please tell us your impressions.
Are you familiar with that music, jgazal? Here is a hint...
If there was ever a post that epitomizes your mode of operation to the letter, this must be the crown jewel.
Geez - you obviously are oblivious to the fact that there are TWO - very different - things described by the same word/term/whatever-is-the-correct-grammar- expressin in English.
One thing is Binaural Beats ( see above )
Another is Binaural Recording ( also see above )
And, one probably could record binaural beats using binaural recording technique ( probably the last thing world needs, but likely doable - although not applicable to any real musical content )
No, I have my own recordings and this one:
I don’t get externalization with them. They immediately collapse.
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.
Is there any real music well recorded in binaural to be had at Amazon? Their search just brings up hippie dippy stuff. I'm interested in it, but I don't want to waste my time if no one knows of any recordings they can recommend.
They are very rare compared to the standard.
That is why gregorio and pinnahertz insisted they are not commercially attractive.
The Neumann is a huge head and not very compatible with my head. Not having response to head movements is also a problem.
That’s also why your search returns only “binaural beats” which are, well, strange...
I feel Mozart do more to alter my brain waves than all that “beats”...
You can try Pearl Jam Binaural:
I don’t get externalization with this one also...
The only thing I object about @gregorio view is that I believe, with no proof, that:
1) objects in distribution + binaural dynamic convolution at playback;
2) close mics and hoa mixing before distribution + binaural dynamic convolution at playback;
3) close mics and binaural synthesis before distribution + binaural dynamic convolution at playback;
All allow certain instruments, frequencies, harmonics or reverberations to be reinforced or softened.
So even without virtual reality headsets, those chains would allow him to apply his creative art, in other words, being different than the real event to compensate for the lack of visual perception.
But that is something I will have to wait to be sure.
I'm looking for something that uses it to recreate a real perspective with acoustic instruments. Pearl Jam is going to be electronic instruments and using it for effect isn't it?
You can try it out for free on YouTube, pretty much the whole record.
I'll hold my opinion until you've heard a bit.
Lack of "externalization" is a typical binaural problem.
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.