Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Letter to MR Jannard, 3D Sound Holophonics™, Opportunity for Red Digital Cinema.

Yes, sounds like binaural miking. What I fail to see is what this has to do with the RED camera. Why would I want a binaural miking setup on my RED camera? The room noise you would pickup would be crazy. I did binaural miking experiments back in College in my dorm room. Yes it's cool but I wouldn't use it for movie making...

Also, anyone who's doing serious filmmaking is re-doing most of the sound in post. It's there that 3D audio and surround techniques would seem to make the most sense. But if I use a proprietary technique that requires special speaker setups then no one will be able to use my DVD products to their full extent.

What am I missing here?
 
You are missing something,
You don't need any special speakers or sound output devices to perceive Holophonics, I use some normal Grado Sr 80, and the effect gives me chills.
I think people misunderstood me or I wrote something wrong, but If I as a filmmaker had the power of Holophonics on set, including my other sound gear, my production level will rise, and as filmmakers we are flexible, we could use it or stop using it.
I will go back to work, Tonight hopefully I could answer your questions and clear things up.

I still feel that this could be a huge asset in anyone's productions

Best Regards
 
Martín Yernazian said:
You are missing something,
You don't need any special speakers or sound output devices to perceive Holophonics, I use some normal Grado Sr 80, and the effect gives me chills.
I think people misunderstood me or I wrote something wrong, but If I as a filmmaker had the power of Holophonics on set, including my other sound gear, my production level will rise, and as filmmakers we are flexible, we could use it or stop using it.
I will go back to work, Tonight hopefully I could answer your questions and clear things up.

I still feel that this could be a huge asset in anyone's productions

Best Regards
Click to expand...
It's ironical that we have sceptics on this forum. I like your spirit and resolve Martin. Keep on it and I am sure you will prove your point.
 
Greg Voevodsky said:
HI Kevin,

What do you think of Holophone?
I'm looking for a simple and easy way to record surround without having spend hours mixing it. Im looking into their Mini G4. It looked great at NAB this year.
Click to expand...

I don't know their prices so perhaps they are a good value, but compared to tetrahedron array (XYZ & W) this won't achieve anywhere near the same level of performance. The real advantage to a true soundfield process is that you can post process to any number of channels and with the true W (pressure) origin, you never have off axis playback errors.

One really interesting thing about a playback array based upon a soundfield recording is that the localization and relative orientation of all sounds work at any point within and even outside of the playback loudspeaker array. I have demonstrated a 6.0 playback system that has a LF, RF, LR & RR but has an added LSH and RSH (where the H component is height). This is an amazing listening experience (and there were a handful of commercial recordings made by Chesky Records based upon this concept).

An added advantage is that with only 4 channels (like the RED) you can record a true, infinitely decodable number of playback channels. Anywhere from 1 (monophonic) to any number of channels can accurately and repeatable be decoded. With a 4 channel delivery system, you can even let the playback end dictate the number and location of each playback loudspeaker with perfect reproduction of the original soundsphere.

With the four signals (XYZ & W) you can use a simple set of plugins to remix (in post) to your target footprint. No effort at all and you never have to worry about phase errors due to different arrival paths as the origin is a single point in three dimensional space.

If you want to learn more, I suggest reading up on the soundfield process or check with Calrec's distributor in your area.
 
rameshjai said:
It's ironical that we have sceptics on this forum. I like your spirit and resolve Martin. Keep on it and I am sure you will prove your point.
Click to expand...
Most of the early RED Skeptics are now RED owners so go figure! Develop your dream Martin, if it bears fruit you'll be a winner.
 
Wall of Sound

Wall of Sound

When you hear it, your hair will go like this.
philspector_narrowweb__300x449,2.jpg


Seriously, Graeme is seriously into sound as he is into color, and I get the feeling that he likes stereo sound. I posted the link to a product that I thought was cool.
http://www.holophone.com/home.html
Graeme responded with a post that gave me the impression that he wasn't into the whole surround sound thing.

Speakers are the weak link in audio systems, so there is lots of room for new inventions.
 
I'm not into listening to surround. Off axis sounds trigger the human fight or flight response and are therefore not relaxing.... (an efect used / abused by action / horror movies).

KHMuse, however, is correct about the soundfield recording techniques that use 4 mics in a tetrahedron. This encodes the entire soundfield and can be later decoded to whatever you want. To me, recording direct to 5.1 is not the way to go as you only need to record 4 channels to get the entire soundfield, so why would I record 6 and get less of the soundfield (missing height with 5.1)? Also, why would I lock myself direct into 5.1, again, rather than recording a complete picture of the soundfield that can be decoded to whatever you want?

And finally, recording the soundfield is a little like recording a movie with a 360 degree fish-eye taking in the entire scene around the camera. We don't shoot narrative drama like that as the whole point of a movie direction is to focus the viewers attention into seeing what the director intended - not to see everything.

Graeme
 
Martin, everyone's being polite to you, but you really need to stop posting using TM symbols and vapid PR and start producing solid results and documentation of your process instead.

I thought I wasn't going to comment on your post but after I gave the Red people such a hard time about their specs page, I thought I should chime in here just to be fair and say that your post sets of my BS alarm bells to an infinitely greater degree.

There are a lot of websites that repost shallow press releases. That's not really the vibe of this site, though. What's cool about Reduser is that the people who write here are really open about what they know and there is a wonderful sharing of knowledge.

I mean, Ty Ford posts here. Go to his site and you'll see a treasure trove of free audio info, sound samples, etc. I respect what he writes because I have learned a lot from him. You should do something similar if you want people to respect your pronouncements on your technology. Break down the current state of 3D sound recording techniques and technologies in an open and un-biased fashion, and explain how your process is superior in a specific use case.

Of course, I hope your product is super-cool and look forward to solid info, facts and samples! Good luck!

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com
 
Well, indeed it is Roger Waters, but it still has "Pink Floyd" on the label.....

I see this thread has dried up - where's the info we were promised?

Graeme
 
Graeme Nattress said:
Well, indeed it is Roger Waters, but it still has "Pink Floyd" on the label.....

I see this thread has dried up - where's the info we were promised?

Graeme
Click to expand...

I offered to review anything that could be shared but never received any direct response.

I am afraid we might have scared him off. Too bad, it might have been interesting.
 
I'm all for hearing about new technology both audio and video related. But I did get skeptical that his approach was to show up on this forum and present his case to Jim. Perhaps he just doesn't have Jim's contact info and this was the only way he knew how to present it, but if that is the case he needed to at least have all his info in place, ready to post links to papers and audio samples. He seemed a bit unprepared to me. He got my interest, just didn't follow it up with anything substantial.

Steve
 
It wasn't just this forum he posted the message to, either!

Graeme
 
i was too busy buying swampland in florida to see this one through.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top