- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,704
INVOLVE NEEDS YOUR HELP- REWARD OFFERED!!
As most of our QQ friends would know we at Involve are passionate about matrix stereo based surround sound and we are actively working on providing recording studio plugins so recording “engineers” can explore stereo compatible surround sound with their artists. We already have developed hardware bases encoders, decoders, full surround sound systems.
We need/ We offer
We want to use the technique of 6 degrees of separation to link to other manufacturers/ recording labels/ movie labels and sales marketing channels to both get Involve encode as the “new stereo” and our products made under license by other manufacturers.
We offer to any QQ member who can help us establish a finalized deal with any such organization 4% of the resultant revenue. If it’s just a “tip off” that leads to a deal and we do all the hard yards we offer 2%. This applies to IP or Product sales.
As we license our recording format for free a separate deal will be made on that shortly (got to think about what fair).
As a comparative measure SRS was sold to DTS for around USD$115 Million, their IP was OK /not world beating but more they had market presence. The basics that made Atmos possible was acquired by Dolby by the purchase of Lake technologies from Australia in the early naughties for around USD$17 Million
Marketing our Intellectual property/ products
We currently have 4 granted patents in the USA and several other countries covering topics of encode/ decode of surround sound and one patent describing our SST (Sweet Spot Technology) for removing the center channel. We have approached many consumer electronics brand names (CE’s) and basically none answer emails/ letters/ phone calls/ smoke signals or Morse code. Typically we find that the only “way in” is to have a friend ……who knows a “mate” ……….who knows the lift driver of someone up the management tree.
We produce products for 2 reasons:
- Helps pay the bills
- It advertises our IP to attract a sale to major consumer (CE’s). This is in accordance with the advice from the ex IP adviser from Dolby- direct IP sales is a thing of the past
So currently we have 4 product area’s
- The Surround Master
- Involve studio encoder (and soon software plugin- to be free issue to studio’s)
- The Y4 surround system (just being redeveloped for the next 3 months)
- The reference Electrostatic hybrid speaker (in production in a month or so – funds permitting)
The answer is no, we are and will never be a failed format. This is because we are in fact the universal format. i.e. STEREO only an enhanced version with NO DOWNSIDE.
The key is all the past format failures was compatibility and they were not compatible either with each other or with the mainstream formats. Unless they had the marketing clout of Sony or were a major advancement which could not be denied e.g. CDs then they failed because they were on their own and not compatible.
We are compatible with everything and everyone. Even Dolby ATMOS recordings have the stereo track available so the recording is universally available and not just listenable to those who have the Atmos decoding system. In my opinion Dolby Atmos will fail for the same reasons many of its predecessors failed – it’s not compatible with anything and its clunky, expensive, and does not offer enough to the bulk of the market sufficient upside to become ubiquitous.
Involve is Stereo with built in 5.1 even though we prefer 4.1 in our own equipment offerings. We are not a new format in the sense we are stereo – we are an enhanced stereo more like 4K TV is enhanced vision. This is to say all the old film/video/TV etc will play on the TV and you don’t have to change anything or switch anything over to watch it. Imagine if 4K TV could not play old movies – it would be a failure. Its success is primarily due to its compatibility and the fact the TV will give you the best picture it can all or at least most of the time.
From a major manufacturer’s standpoint Involve is a new format and they have learnt, over time, this is a problem. However, if we can get across the fact that they NEVER loose and we are the compatible new format with only upside then the resistance to adopting Involve will be significantly decreased.
We need to get this across to Sony and all other brands.
General Background
Way back in the grim dark days of 2009, I worked out that surround sound was getting way to over complicated and confusing with a myriad of cross formats with many incompatible and not backwards compatible (history repeating). Since then we have added Dolby Atmos, DTS X and now DTS X virtual. The common trend has been if 5.1 channels does not work then the solution must be ADD MORE CHANNELS!!
Receiver front panels are virtually clones with a battle of the logo’s of compatible formats displayed[CvD1] and the rear panels are so complicated that you need a PhD in nuclear brain surgery just to operate the menu system (60 year old discrimination!). And now for $500 you can get a “receiver” that compatible to just about all these formats that no one uses due to confusion eg:
https://hometheaterreview.com/pioneer-vsx-933-72-channel-network-av-receiver-reviewed/
Sure, it’s got everything but frankly it still sounds crap to this not so little black duck.
Our aim/ philosophy
- That surround sound can be well contained within a stereo carrier and then decoded out to full 360 degree surround just as well as a discrete system to the human ear.
- The entire low level path of audio and recorded media should be standardized to 2 channel or Involve Stereo. Around 90% of recorded music and video is in fact transmitted by stereo now eg, CD, Youtube, Ipod, Netflix, TV, radio, Spotify, Apple music, tidal, pandora, vinyl records, cassettes (I like them!)
- The center channel has major issues with distorting the frontal image under or over the TV and is an unnecessary complication. We developed and have international granted patents on SST (Sweet Spot Technology) that gets rid of the sweet spot and maintains a consistent image all around the listening area.
- The combination of Involve encode/ decode, SST and planar speakers have produced a virtually even SPL all around the listening area- even when sitting close to one speaker. The use of more than 4 speakers is not needed.
- Whilst height is a popular fad it can be easily simulated by simply elevating the rear speakers and a small amount of HRTF……4 speakers rule! Or use dual Involve encode and 8 speakers (works great -we have done it).
BUT DISCRETE IS AUTOMATICALLY SUPERIOR TO A MATRIX SYSTEM?
This is where I get controversial.
Technically in terms of pure numbers – yes but in terms of human perception no. In fact, we have found in several trials of human test monkeys that there usually is a slight preference to Involve encode/ decode to the same performance presented by discrete- on an instant blind A/ B comparison basis. This slight preference to our matrix is because
- People do not perceive the steering we do
- We extract additional surround that the discreet method missed- this is because the recording “engineers” are time restricted and cannot always create a true environment, more likely just the usual pings and pongs of a movie presentation.
Here is a bunch of tests we did a few years ago:
Involve vs Discreet
Room setting.
Author: David Alexandrou
Internal use only.
Quick intro:
Involve audio is a 4/5 to 2 encode/decode matrix that can also decode surround from existing 2 channel sources.
System comparison:
Discreet audio vs. Involve Audio
Set-up:
Clip used: Money – Dark Side of the Moon 4 channel DVD-audio
Speakers: RTA (Involve) Electrostatic Total Perspective speakers
Presentation: Audio only
Speaker width to listener ratio 1:1
Note: Central Imaging is traditionally considered difficult in this configuration.
Test Subjects: 11
Format:
Subject was played the audio, switching between the discreet and Involve versions of the audio. The systems were only identified as either No. 1 or No. 2.
The subject was then asked to comment on various qualities of the sound, paying attention to
Any discernible differences between the two systems
Audio Quality
Surround quality.
The subject was then asked if they had a preference to any of the systems in particular, and asked to give reasons for their answer.
Preferences
Subjects were asked if they had a preference for either system. The results were as follows:
Involve: 5
No Preference: 4
Discreet: 2
Observable qualitative results:
In each case where Involve was picked as the preference, the results point to either an increase in the sound richness or fullness, and better distinction of surround sound elements.
The subjects who preferred discreet had a different reason to each other.
Conclusions
The test data as it stands indicates strongly that Involve matrix decoding is as good as or better than discreet surround sound.
So how can a matrix system actually perform better yet is technically inferior??
The answer is very complicated but human hearing is really good but not in the areas that most reviewers test. In truth we get confused quite easily and, in some respects can only focus on one event at a time. We are all from an evolution point of view “frightened little bunnies”. We focus and react to the first sound arrival and virtually ignore the second sound. This is shown in the HAAS precedence curve below:
HAAS CURVE
You will note that the first sound dominates perception of the second sound arrival even if the second sound is 12 dB louder than the first sound. Please note that with most voice/ music/ events sound is typically dominated moment to moment by a dominant event such as a pin dropping or a guitar plucking.
Also, psychological tests have shown that we really get confused on simultaneous tones particularly at close or related frequencies, meaning even though the individual 4 channels are separated by say 100 dB the listener may not be able to perceive direction! So much for the marketing hype on discreet separation.
Our tests have also demonstrated that no additional separation is perceived by the listener beyond 12 dB separation. I know this is a hard pill to swallow for all those chasing big numbers but its true. Having said that we exceed this in all occasions.
When you add up all the above, it goes a long way into explaining why even a basic matrix decoder without steering ”logic” can actually sound quite good, better than the expected 3 – 6 dB numbers would suggest.
The big trick is the steering “logic” that works out and isolates the dominant event and “places” it in the right location without pumping or smearing effects. All sounds are not equal in “weight” when you start to compare dominance. For example, a 3 kHz tone at 1 V will sound way louder than a bass or high treble tone at 10 V. In addition, we need when comparing directional dominance to group the harmonics into bands so that the instrument stays as a whole to prevent smearing. Hence the importance of our tri band separate processing.
Above all the above comes the issue of how to place the sound without the human perceiving the “mechanical” action of the placement, careful consideration needs to be made of multiple band related attack and decay time constants.
The importance of the above is that the most predictive and useful separation number for a matrix is how it separates instantly say in 20 ms time slices. Our own Intelligent Involve encode/ decode achieves around 34 -44 dB separation in all directions on this instantaneous basis but on steady tone may be lower in some area but never lower that 12 dB (it’s a magic number). Instantaneously our matrix resembles QS but on steady tone the matrix constants MAY vary according to the surround/ stereo content. All on a tri band encode basis.
Encoder set to QS - INVOLVE decode
outputs
I O | Left Rear | Left Front | Right Front | Right Rear |
Left Rear | 0 | -35.4 | -36.5 | -40 |
Left Front | -37.7 | 0 | -43.1 | -35.4 |
Right Front | -34.0 | -38.4 | 0 | -36.5 |
Right Rear | -37.7 | -34.0 | -38.0 | 0 |
AVERAGE SEPARATION -37.2 dB
Encoder set to INVOLVE - INVOLVE decode
outputs
I O | Left Rear | Left Front | Right Front | Right Rear |
Left Rear | 0 | -43.1 | -43.1 | -48.0 |
Left Front | -12.0 | -1.0 | -23.1 | -26.0 |
Right Front | -28.0 | -23.1 | -1.0 | -12.0 |
Right Rear | -38.4 | -34.0 | -40.0 | 0 |
| | | |
AVERAGE SEPARATION -30.9 dB
Note the lower separation numbers (greater than 20 ms duration) of 12 dB are front to back, not left to right.
The advantage of all this results in the encoded stereo signal being dynamically full separation 40 dB and absolute short duration minimum of 12 dB. Translation it is 100% indistinguishable from plane old vanilla stereo. In comparison the standard QS stereo encode will be image compressed to 6 dB – one of the big reasons QS failed to be accepted as a recording standard.
For full test results refer:
Involve audio DSP implementation test results. Tested May 2009 (steady tone on QS input)
Surround Master Involve Proper - QS Decode?
Surround Master Involve Proper - QS Decode? Part 2 Four Channel Continuous Sinusoidal Signals Decode Test
(This last test compares Involve vs the Sansui QSD-1 ON SEPARATE MIXED SIGNAL INPUT CONTINUOUS TONE)
[CvD1]
Attachments
Last edited: