Dear All
I was misinformed by Dave the Bitch the sample track above was in DUMB fixed parameter Involve format- OOOPS sorry chaps.
OK here is a link to 4 test tones, sine waves in smart and fixed encode, and pink noise in smart and fixed encode, for your delight.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1nfYC3dS0MfMgO_CQ8BEeVRMHCTRPlFid?usp=sharing
I think I have been a good boy this time and made it available to all, if not kick my fat lazy butt.
To cut a long story short here below is a screenshot of Dumb fixed parameter Involve encode in tone packets:
View attachment 55844
RL..................................................................................FL.......................................................................FR.......................................................................RR.........................................
As you can see the blend/ mix is 0.21 in magnitude meaning in stereo its around 13.5 db separation, remember my 12 db is all you can detect rule, don't believe me try it! When you decode it into surround you get a MINIMUM of 12 db separation in all directions. I cannot find the decode results tonight- give me a day or two. Advantage is it sounds normal for stereo and surround - providing you are not in a numbers pissing contest that we have never been!
Hey on a QS source signal we get 35 - 40 db separation in all directions but the downside is the stereo QS encode sounds compressed in terms of image to a puny 6 - 8 db or so.
So below is a screenshot of SMART Involve encode variable parameter packet tone:
View attachment 55847
RL........................................................................FL......................................................................FR..........................................................................RR........................................
Spot the difference?
The mix/ blend increases to a peak value of 0.41 only when surround (rear ) information is present. If its just plan old boring bog vanilla stereo the encode reduces the blend parameter to the lower extreme 0.21. Now you gotta remember its doing this in a triband manner so when one frequency band might have surround but another might just be stereo - at all times we are adjusting the psychoacoustic parameters of the matrix. Please note that us humans are really bad at perceiving multiple directions of SIMULTANEOUS similar frequency band tones so in those instances we need all the help we can get in terms of matrix separation (also thats the hardest thing for a matrix encoder to split up ) . On normal music where things are peaking all over the place in different frequency bands at different times both human hearing can separate well and the matrix encoders eat it for breakfast.
So SMART Involve encode is the first (to my knowledge) variable mix encode parameter triband encoder. The end result is that the stereo sounds like stereo and the separation (worst case) is below:
View attachment 55849
The bottom one is Smart involve encode, as you can see you get a theoretical worst case separation of 12 db front to rear in 2 instances but in practice it never really happens as these tests were on FIXED TONES - not music where the full 0.41 parameter would be mostly in use and so the actual overall result would be the average of the two above separation tables. Hope you guys get my point, I know its confusing and my head also hurts this time of night (12.30 am ).
Oh its all patented - full PCT in multiple countries!!!
Nigh Nigh