←back to thread

242 points Anon84 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
almd ◴[] No.42161878[source]
This is often used by audio mixing engineers and taught in a roundabout way at schools and studios. We think a lot about where thins “sit” in the mix. Proximity wise, and even height wise in a stereo mix. Eventually you learn how to locate things in headphones and it’s a really weird sensation when you realize you can do it. The kicker is we start out by simulating real environments in mixes, but then end up having to simulate what people expect from the medium as opposed to real life. For example something I learned doing video audio, if someone is writing something on a train, viewers expect to hear the pen on paper. But irl, there’s not a chance it’s audible. Explosions are always distorted because microphones end up clipping due to the volume, etc.

A great book on spatial simulation is The Art of Mixing by David Gibson. Older but forever relevant

replies(5): >>42162108 #>>42162409 #>>42163060 #>>42163148 #>>42165495 #
romwell ◴[] No.42163148[source]
That's not at all what echolocation is. What you describe is locating the source of sound using binaural hearing (similar to how we can gauge distances using stereoscopic vision).

Echolocation is finding out distance to objects (not sound sources!) by sending a sound wave in a direction, and listening for echos that bounce back. Hence echolocation.

The only sound source is you.

It's a form of active sensing: literally how a submarine sonar works (or radar, for that matter). Bats do it, too.

This has very little to do with "locating things in headphones", as that is entirely missing the active part in the first place.

Then, locating sound sources using binaural hearing is not the same as analyzing the scattered echoes when the sound source is you (relative to yourself, you know where you are already!).

It's interesting that this is currently the top comment. I wonder how many people read the article before engaging in this discussion.

replies(2): >>42163204 #>>42165439 #
1. planewave ◴[] No.42163204[source]
This comment captures a lot of important detail about echolocation.
replies(1): >>42169652 #
2. romwell ◴[] No.42169652[source]
Thanks! I'm glad you found it useful.