Re: About AudioPannerNode

I'm pretty late responding to this, but I would recommend ONLY supporting
developer-supplied HRTFs.

>From experience, doing good, convincing 3d audio with HRTFs is not as easy
or obvious as many research papers might lead you to believe.
I know of only one vendor (http://smyth-research.com/index.html) selling a
product that provides truly convincing HRTF-based processing.
Most implementations have poor externalization, not to mention the usual
font-back and height confusions.

As a result, a normative HRTF implementation will most likely end up being
a mediocre implementation.

But since it will be standardized, there is a big risk it will permanently
kill innovation in 3d audio for WebAudio.

It is guaranteed to do this if there is no support for developer-supplied
HRTFs.

On the other hand, if developer-supplied HRTFs are supported, it is no big
deal for a developer to use one of the free HRTF sets
that might have been the basis for the normative HRTF.

Sincerely,
   Frederick


On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Marcus Geelnard <mage@opera.com> wrote:

> Den 2012-06-27 07:50:31 skrev Robert O'Callahan <robert@ocallahan.org>:
>
>
>  On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> wrote:
>>
>>  I'm happy to share the measured HRTF files that we use in WebKit.  I'm
>>> not
>>> sure if they should be normative or not...
>>>
>>>
>> If the HRTFs aren't standardized then it will make testing much harder and
>> developers won't be able to get predictable results. So there should be
>> normative HRTFs.
>>
>> If later there is a need to support alternative (perhaps "better") HRTFs
>> then we could add a way for developers to use their own HRTFs, or choices
>> of additional built-in HRTFs.
>>
>>
> +1
>
>
>
> --
> Marcus Geelnard
> Core Graphics Developer
> Opera Software ASA
>
>