[aos]

Because there is no point in trying this. In case you haven't noticed, "they" don't want us to meddle in their affairs. Implementation is only available if you have money and even then at "their" discretion. And if you want to create your own implementation, exact details of the format itself are available only after signing NDA. It's not an open standard, or even a patent-protected one where specs are well known. And even if you reverse-engineer it, you would be a subject to DMCA. Speaking for myself, I have no desire to waste my time and money on recreating an approximation. This game is rigged; I don't want to play it. If you don't like the face of the new world order, talk to your congress(wo)man, instead of criticizing the rest of us who don't want to go to jail or lose all their (meager that they are) possessions for something this trivial.

Besides, all you need is a laptop (if you want portable) or another computer with a digital out; install DVD player which supports Dolby Headphone and use external DAC. That way the sound quality is controlled by the external DAC yet you get all the proper stuff thanks to Dolby Headphone implementation. Though this doesn't work with SACD of and probably not the DVD-A either. Works great for movies though.

 

[kevin gilmore]

In the latest stereophile there is an ad from headroom
selling the new akg dolby surround amplifier for headphones.

I did not find it on the headroom site, so i don't know the price
or availability...

Model 999 i think...

 

[DCameronMauch]

Rick: So you are content discussing the same stuff over and over... Don't know where you got your dictionary, but mine under DIY doesn't say anything about rejecting innovation. Sure, helping newbies is very important. But is there room for nothing else? Consider that if everyone felt the same way, this hobby we all love would not even exist. Take Nelson Pass. He wasn't born the audio god he is today. Once upon a time, he was a DIYer.

Dusty: I understand. I am sure there are people in this forum much better than I with op-amp based filter design. I was hoping one of them would assist. But I was forced to do it myself. Also please note that I never said anyone here was lazy. I have only spoken of ambition and willingness to try. What really dissappoints me about this forum is that I believe all the necessary skills, intelligence, and man power is here to design stuff that rivals if not outperforms anything commercial available. That is what we could be. But we are not. And for no reason other than attitude.

AOS: No point?!? When did I ever mention using DSP code from Dolby? I was talking about HRTF impulse responses which are public domain and readily available. The DSP code for processing a signal in this way is also public domain. Forget about Dolby already. There is absolutely no copyright infringement in what I have suggested. Approximation? If you use a DSP with those impulse responses, it is as close as anyone can get. So you think this is trivial? And also a waste of your time? Why are you even here? You sound like a consumer, not a DIYer.

Kevin: Now you are an innovator. And I can not express how happy I am that you are here. I would like to see more of that innovative spirit I know you have in the forum. I don't know if this is the case, but I can very easily imagine how you might have given up on the idea of collaboration, atleast publicly in places like this. I have and it's a shame.

Perhaps I should move on. I would have a heart attack if a word I said would change anything. It never does...

 

[aos]

Quote:

AOS: No point?!? When did I ever mention using DSP code from Dolby? I was talking about HRTF impulse responses which are public domain and readily available. The DSP code for processing a signal in this way is also public domain. Forget about Dolby already. There is absolutely no copyright infringement in what I have suggested. Approximation? If you use a DSP with those impulse responses, it is as close as anyone can get. So you think this is trivial? And also a waste of your time? Why are you even here? You sound like a consumer, not a DIYer.

Even if what you are saying is right (theory that Dolby based their algorithms on, with all the functions and parameters correct, is publicly available, now that would be something, next we'll see Rambus apologizing to JEDEC), to properly implement it you'd need to use DSP. Which means doing A/D conversion on each channel because sure as hell you are not going to be able to tap into decoded channels digitally. What is the point of degrading sound quality just so you could get multichannel? Eliminating advantage of the high rate PCM or SACD, not to mention eliminating SACD's reason for existance (DSD).

I have thought of multichannel before and the only thing that comes to mind is modding an existing decoder, or ripping out the digital chip with its algorithms and putting it into your own. As I said, I don't believe it's worth spending your time on unless you can get to decoded digital stream.

And, if you're going to attack people for not wanting to work on more complex things (which isn't true), I suggest you go over on Headwize and look what was done over the last several years by some of the people here. And also consider that Head-Fi is not a hardcore DIY forum and that the rules of posting here keep a lot of people out. You appear unaware of the past history of Headwize and Head-Fi; I doubt you'd be reacting like this if you were.