If there are significantly better and truer ambisonic opcodes to be had, I 
for one would be happy to redo my recent compositions to take advantage of 
them. For one thing, Victor's "kludge" of stereo ambisonics (granted, a most 
effective one) would hopefully no longer be required.

Can someone advise as to what sonic improvement results from the revisions?

Art Hunkins

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "jpff" 
To: "Developer discussions" 
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2008 10:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Cs-dev] Ambisonic code


>
>
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:17:42PM +0100, jpff wrote:
>>
>> > Just before i went on holiday I was provided with new ambisonic
>> > encode/decode sources from Richard Furse and Bruce Wiggins, checked by
>> > Fons.  As there are significant differences in arguments and
>> > functionality I have renamed these as bformenc1 and bformdec1, and
>> > checked them in.  I have not yet written the documentation as I was
>> > really meant to be on holiday not computing.....
>> >
>> > So, documentation is a day or so.  Better opcode names most welcome.
>> > ==John ffitch
>>
>> They are actually meant to be *replacements* for the current opcodes,
>> which are, to put it diplomatically, problematic. If we had wanted to
>> provide 'state of the art' opcodes or any new functionality they would
>> have looked rather different.
>
> I realise that they are really replacements, but the principle of never
> breaking existing pieces is important.  I woul;d rather not do a survey of
> all users on these opcodes.....  I would like better names though.
>
>>
>> The decoders should be functionally compatible with the existing ones.
>
> Except that there are less options.
>
>>
>> The only thing we did leave out are the per-order gain factors for the
>> encoding opcode, as this is definitely not the right place to apply
>> them. I you need a non-standard encoding (but we can't imagine why
>> you would) it is trivial to apply such gain factors in the orchestra
>> definition.
>>
>
> The negative inputs would fail as well.
>
>> If you really want to keep the old ones, at least put a note in their
>> docs that they have been replaced by a more correct implementation.
>>
>
> I was going to mark the originals as deprecated as soon as I had rehacked
> the documentation
>
> Sorry if this seems to underestimate your work; I am delighted that you
> have sorted out this area.  I would like to record a big thank you to you,
> and Richard and Barry, and all the others I failed to note.
>
> ==John ff
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's 
> challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great 
> prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the 
> world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net