IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Vorbis Spec., Request for Formal Specification
ricardo
post Jan 26 2007, 00:32
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23-January 07
Member No.: 39925



I'm new on the forum and am having difficulty finding stuff.

Is there a page with a format definition of Vorbis?

I'm thinking of something along the lines of

http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM_Draft2
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Kef
post Jan 26 2007, 00:37
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 116
Joined: 2-December 05
From: Netherlands
Member No.: 26157



QUOTE (ricardo @ Jan 26 2007, 01:32) *
I'm new on the forum and am having difficulty finding stuff.

Is there a page with a format definition of Vorbis?

I'm thinking of something along the lines of

http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/OggPCM_Draft2


Have you tried the first link that shows up after typing "vorbis specification" in google? rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by Kef: Jan 26 2007, 00:45
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HotshotGG
post Jan 26 2007, 04:12
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 1593
Joined: 24-March 02
From: Revere, MA
Member No.: 1607



http://www.xiph.org/vorbis/doc/

Here is what you are looking for you. You never specified what spec you were interested in. That about sums them up.


--------------------
College student/IT Assistant
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ricardo
post Jan 26 2007, 23:32
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23-January 07
Member No.: 39925



Many thanks Gentlemen.

This is just what I'm looking for.

section 4.3.9 output channel order says

"Applications using Vorbis for dedicated purposes may define channel mapping as seen fit. Future channel mappings (such as three and four channel Ambisonics [http://www.ambisonic.net/]) will make use of channel mappings other than mapping 0."

The surround sound discussion group

https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/options/s...0justnet.com.au

is keen to have Ambisonics properly managed in Vorbis.

Is this the right forum to open a discussion on this?

Or is setting the spec for Vorbis II better dealt with elsewhere?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HotshotGG
post Jan 27 2007, 00:40
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1593
Joined: 24-March 02
From: Revere, MA
Member No.: 1607



QUOTE
is it keen to have Ambisonics properly managed in Vorbis.

Is this the right forum to open a discussion on this?


No it's not the encoder needs to redesigned in order to properly support ambisonic decoding. Yes this is the right forum. It's supposed to support up to Ambisonic-G format, which sounds more out of reach to me then the normal Ambisonic-B rig, but I am sure they have something in mind.


--------------------
College student/IT Assistant
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ricardo
post Jan 27 2007, 22:57
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 23-January 07
Member No.: 39925



QUOTE (HotshotGG @ Jan 27 2007, 09:40) *
No it's not the encoder needs to redesigned in order to properly support ambisonic decoding. Yes this is the right forum. It's supposed to support up to Ambisonic-G format, which sounds more out of reach to me then the normal Ambisonic-B rig, but I am sure they have something in mind.


Actually B-format is the usual Studio format from which all other formats are derived. This is what we want to formalise in Vorbis.

G-format is simply a supa dupa Ambisonic format decoded into 4.0, 5.0, 5.1 ... Zillion.1 so anyone can play it.

I'll start another thread for the discussion.

Many Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HotshotGG
post Jan 27 2007, 23:07
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1593
Joined: 24-March 02
From: Revere, MA
Member No.: 1607



QUOTE
Actually B-format is the usual Studio format from which all other formats are derived. This is what we want to formalise in Vorbis.

G-format is simply a supa dupa Ambisonic format decoded into 4.0, 5.0, 5.1 ... Zillion.1 so anyone can play it.

I'll start another thread for the discussion.


The only time I have actually heard of ambisonic-B format being acessible is for recordings that were done with a Soundfield Microphone. I hear it terms of three-dimensionality and spatialization it's better then 5.1 recordings, but then again how many people actually listen to 5.1 recordings properly let alone make sure they are mixed correctly. wink.gif

This post has been edited by HotshotGG: Jan 27 2007, 23:10


--------------------
College student/IT Assistant
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd September 2014 - 06:47