2D panner

I've been doing some spatialization for video lately, so I decided it was a good moment to make a binaural(ish) panner. It doesn't try too hard to be realistic, but it's flexible enough to do silly things like this:

That's meters. Look Andrew, I still hate the empire! (?)

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

ANDREW221231

LOL, its like i always said, if it counts in base 12 send it straight to hell

this thing is fun, at extreme settings my synthesizer sounds to be angrily dive bombing around me

Laureano Lopez

if it counts in base 12 send it straight to hell

Indeed

this thing is fun, at extreme settings my synthesizer sounds to be angrily dive bombing around me

Yep, it gets violent quite easily 😁 You can also do absurd things with the eq, like things sounding brighter as they move away, or duller as they approach the ear. I considered using hrtfs but they're way too specific, for starters most measurements are quite different between ears. I know real life is chaotic but I don't want to imprint the same "real life" event everywhere... Actually that's why I also avoid convolution reverbs heh

ANDREW221231

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/7992#Comment_7992

yeah the volume changes put it squarely in scary territory

'm sure some people disagree but i have always thought of HRTFs as something purely in the realm of 'look what i can do'

i have never in my life wanted to find out what someone elses ears sound like and am pretty doubtful that i would end up finding out if i tiried

the only time i really half way did stuff with convolution that i felt pleased with was when using that UNFILTER plugin by zynaptiqto linearize the transfer function first. without doing that it always sounds too coloured in a way that is rough on the ears and gross. hat on a hat? ear on an ear? linear and unchanging for all time/? eghhhhh

know what you ought to is a physical model of the ear canal instead. then you can dial it in, whatever, make something that would really freak people out

Laureano Lopez

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/8067#Comment_8067

to linearize the transfer function first

That's usually my approach, to study the thing a little trying to find some simple shape that's close enough to fool someone who's not paying excessive attention

what you ought to is a physical model of the ear canal instead

Well, pretty much. Most often I prefer the results of a good model rather than sampling, except when the thing is so utterly complicated that people waste their phd's trying to model it and it still fails 😅 Anyway, physical modelling is quite above my head in general, save for the very simplest things...

ANDREW221231

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/8237#Comment_8237

except when the thing is so utterly complicated that people waste their phd's trying to model it and it still fails

i know what you mean, i thought for a time i had the sand to make a decent physical model of a sitar, with my 'aggressive winging it' approach'. LOL, i ceded defeat on that one. its kind of funny actually, of my two failed sitars, the one that's less of a failure is the one that uses convolution for the drone bank... which is even funnier given that the reading i've done on PHD projects attempts to model them that is a big no no because the string model needs to be nonlinear... so anything linear time invariant is not appropriate. yeah, think i'll leave the physical modelling to Chet Singer and stick to what i'm OK at (not much)

Quick links

Unanswered questions