Ruffled Feathers -n- All......The Integral Transference Project

The Integral Transference Project

For those who were up earlier, a gentleman posted a rather bizzarre thread with some extremely crypic info about some technology promising to 'revolutionize' the listening experiance, something called the Integral Transference Project.

I've been working all night, and not exactly in the mood to decipher this material, but a few of us asked (perhaps not as deftly as we might have) for some basic information on the concept, and perhaps an executive summary of sorts. I'm not naming names, but the gentleman was less than thrilled with our response and deleted the entire thread (I didn't think that was possible once a post had been replied to..)

Perhaps we're all here too stOOpid :withstpd: to absorb this material, but I didn't want the above link lost. I plan on digging my way through it...soon...to see exactly what this is: either some truly novel thinking in the way of sound reproduction, or more snake-oil disguised as the former.

Either way, the link is there for your perusal. The original poster was certainly sold enough on this material to send a rather curt PM to me regarding my (and the few others who posted) supposed 'disinterest’. If the gentleman happens to read this thread, I'd simply say that there are better ways to approach a complex topic than to toss the reader in head-first off a 50' cliff.

For my own part, I will offer a public apology for my remarks, though they were NOT posted with any intended ill-will. If one expects to be belittled and scoffed at, then any remark other than one of glowing praise can be interpreted as one of animosity. And for that apparent misunderstanding, I apologize. But I will also reiterate what I stated in my return PM...grow a thicker skin (this IS the internet, after all) and work on your people skills.

Lastly, I'd like to see what some members might be able to decipher from the Integral Transference Project website. As I said, it's been a long day and I'm not in the mood to dig out my decoder ring and attempt to make heads or tails of this info at the moment. But certainly there are some bright minds here at AK, and I'd like to see what we might make of this...BS or brilliance.

EW

After reading the first paragraph all I can say is I doubt wherever that page was going was for me and I would venture to guess not many of AK members either.

it is a revolutionary step forward that could help define sound reproduction technology for the next fifty years and beyond.

I looked thru a few pages. I looked at the "Mystery Boxes" I tend to agree with Grumpy.

having seen the line above a few times in the last 35 years........

And now! Bob Carver on crack meets the DBX man.

Whats Next

Lets see "Reality CD" or Reality DVD" ???

I think everyone wonders what the future hold for sound and video reproduction. What would be nice is a distilled version of about a paragraph in length to jump start our imaginations.

22 years of reasearch in new technology could be a very boring read. Like EW said "Dont throw us off a cliff" and expect us to understand what just happened.

I can only imagine what a truly exact duplicate of a sound or video event would be like. No CD or DVD limitations. . . The exact same experience as live. . .

Can we do this with our vintage gear??? Some already think they do. . . And for good reason. . .

Echo, thanks for rescuing that link. I only found the thread after the gentleman deleted it. I have waded through about 2/3 of it. Man, I thought my math texts were dry. How can someone take a subject about which we are so passionate, and make it sound so dead. I guess it helps preserve the detachment necessary for objectivity.

Anyway, my impression, as an uninformed layman, is that this theory proposes reproducing sound in a manner similar to a holodeck on Star Trek. Not referring to the technology, but the idea that the reproduction creates a 3D soundstage which envelopes the listener, creating point sources around the listener, to reproduce the live event. The 'macro' volume is the room ambience, and the 'micro' volumes are the reproduced point sources, individual instruments. Requires some pretty dense datastream, for that level of sophisitcation. Theory describes something which would be about an order of magnitude above HT (5.1, 6.1,7.1, 8.1, how many channels would you like, sir?) The sticking point for me is this: When I go to a concert, I don't get to sit on stage. The whole event is designed to provide me, the audience member, with the experience of a musical presentation directed at the audience. Concerts using audio reinforcement present to the audience. Acoustic concerts, usually in small venues, seem to me to be the performance equivalent of 'nearfield listening'. Each has its own characteristics, but neither resemble what the gentleman describes.

FWIW, if the day ever arrives when stereo presentation, of the music I love, becomes tired, stale, something I can no longer abide, I may consider investigating any alternative formats which may be available at that time. Considering the levels of improvement in 2-channel reproduction which I have yet to explore (anybody got a winning lottery ticket lying around? Just PM me! ) I imagine that day is far, far into the future.

I have just thought of the ultimate surround speaker. It is shaped like a halo and is suspended from the ceiling. Sit in the center of it and YOWZA! Better than 20.1 channel HT!

I apolagize for my remark. I was only adding what I thought was humor to complicated read. If this person had been around AK for a period of time he might have understood, but I can understand him being offended.
Anyways I found what little I could understand interesting. Its unfortunate that he deleted it. What I was hoping for was a layman explanation of the concept. By him or AK members.

Hello.

I pulled the link and my initial thread due to lack of intrest actually. I come out stating, this is not easy to understand and would like some dialog "please" in a nice professional manner to what "you guys think" and I put disclaimers such as I am not selling anything, et al.

Here is my original post.


On to the future, rate of change of the nature of technology, is exponential. Lets look at going decades further, beyond what we will actually take full advantage of. If we get the chance of working with some of it, it will roll us back some where we can see more future. Lets look at it.


I would like to start some dialog about this project. The papers and patents are complete. I will disclose my involvement with this. I was introduced to this research about 12 years ago and have been involved with some of the "proving" aspects of it. It is pretty deep, it works and it is detailed. This is totally open to all types of discussion from viability, miniturazation and effective Implimentation. Possible areas would be..theme parks, theatrical events, special features like light and sound shows for major corporations and hopefully the trickle-down to the consumer (one day). I do want to mention some of the chief areas that have been covered are:

Backwards compatability with all sources, from multitrack, surround schemes, 2 channel and even mono. The ability to have a secure hardware based protocol that is virtually "copyproof" in the form of artists rights (MP3 downloads, ripping CD's et al..)

I am looking for the audio lover and music lovers perspective, based on reading the papers and absorbing the material. I can answer a few questions or invite the writer /designer to answer.

As someone who has been in audio for 30 years, I do find these type of discussions to be enlightning and very productive. The public release of this information, well you saw it here first.

I just wanted to throw this out there for discussion! A lot of time and money has gone into this. I or the inventor is not a manufacturer, dealer or member of any sales team.

Site is:

http://www.integraltransference.com/

This is intended for dialog purposes. It is not intended for flame fests, advertising or any other purposes. Some perspective is all I am looking for. Some very smart cookies reside in these forums. I know the concept was hard for me to grasp but at least..it is moving forward.

In all due appreciation folks.


End of thread.....

Here are my so called "curt" responses. The both of them.


Originally Posted by Roberts
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. I was unaware that a formal introduction must precede any dialog prior to the presentation of a research and development paper presented on a Home hobbiest audio forum.

I duly stand corrected and deleted the information.

Thank you Sir for bringing this to my immediate attention.

Sincerely,

Roberts

I apologize for posting content which is inappropriate for a home hobbiest audio discussion forum. It was pointed out that a "formal introduction" should precede any technical information of this nature.

For your personal observances, here is the link. I apologize for posting information in an inappropriate setting. Well over One Million US$ has been spent on this project. I do not want to jepordize its integrety by placing the information where it can be misconstrued.

Thank you for your understanding.

Sincerely,

Roberts

The web link:
http://www.integraltransference.com/

You may direct questions through me and I will see to it the designer/inventor/patent holder gets the information. I can answer many of your questions if you like. The inventor gets several hundred emails per day and may likely not have time to respond in a timely manner. This is not an advertisement as we do not have a product to sell. It is a concept. I simply wanted to open some dialog on it. Perhaps now is not an appropriate time for public viewing.

Sincerely,

Roberts.


I just want to set the record strait that in no way did I come in here "A GUNS A BLAZIN'" or give "curt" responses. It is just obvious this thread does not belong in this type of forum. Thats all..so I pulled it, to see it reposted.

If you guys want to talk about it, thats fine, if not, thats fine too. No hard feelings (there never were any)

Cheers,
Roberts

Damn, that bent the meter on my BS detector!!! Got to love the lingo though. Reminds me of EST. Ya I know, I just don't get it!

Ron-C

Listeners not inovators

From my point of view only. . . We have always been told of new formats etc. From Mono to Stereo to Quad to Surround to ProLogic to DTS, DD5.1 to 7.1 EX etc. etc. etc.
Super Audio CDs, DVD audio etc. etc.

I know there are more like HCCD etc, but I am basically a listener not an inovator. Show me what you have and I will listen to it and tell you if I like it or not.

Personally I like analog stereo for music and 5.1 for movies. I can not speak to new formats as I am not qualified to add any useful information.

I can say that if the sound improved I would notice it and I expect it will improve. However I have absolutly no idea of how.

My nickle. . .

roberts, I think you will agree that reading through white papers, that took 12 years to research and compose, can be pretty tough sledding for most of us. We are not a bad group, although some of us, myself included, can fling it with the best of them. That said, a discussion about a topic of this breadth and depth really benefits from the presence of someone who may actually know and understand what is being presented. Without that guidance, the rest of us are just pissing in the wind, so to speak.

Thank you for your offer of email contact and information. I might note that continuing in thread form would spare you multiple iterations of a question. Anyone, who might be interested, could read your response to their yet-unasked question. If you prefer not to participate in a thread discussion of this project, here or elsewhere, that is certainly your prerogative. I doubt this thread will survive very long without your presence, though, which would be a shame.

After I finish reading the rest of the papers, I will probably take you up on your offer, as I already have some questions.

Thank you, and good luck to you.

That seems to be a lot of wrting that doesnt say much.

Page 16 of the Decenber issue of "Sound & Vision" magazine contains info on a new technology called "Iosono".

I now quote from the text.....

"Designed for use in theme parks, movie theaters, and (eventually) home theaters, Iosono uses computers, complex mathematical formulas based on wave field synthesis, and a 360 degree array of speakers to create a broad, HYPER-realistic soundscape in which sound effects can be precisely placed."

It goes on to say that specially calibrated and phased speakers, as many as 300-400 in some cases............

That's right about where I stopped reading. 300-400.1 surround sound. I can't wait to see the back of the flagship receivers.

TA

Iosono is in a practical development stage and has been demonstrated. The German team has not addressed "The macro/micro volume" aspects yet but George Massenburg states he was "blown away" by the demonstration they gave. Eventually these types of rendering engines and hardware/software solutions will trickle down into the home audio arena. We are seeing the dawn of digital amplification making its way affordabally in home audio receivers. The natural evolution of reproduced audio should find a major leap in waveform propagation and construction, hopefully in our lifetime. Thinking completely "outside of the box" will be required for merging technologies to be practical in the home. I will admit the Iosono project is physically huge. To have a model that would be "home audio environment friendly", the Macro/micro volume is essential. Active acoustics, which has been implemented for over 20 years has not found its way into home audio as of yet. The concept certainly works and is being used in higher end automobiles for noise cancelling purposes. Imagine having acoustics (your walls) that have immediately changing absorbtion/reflection properties at 64 bit speed to shape the sound stream as it approaches the listener. Acceptability will "make or break" a technology to the home market place. For commercial useage, these barriers are much easier to penetrate. This is why commercial Jet airplanes were soaring above our globe with paid passengers on them over 50 years ago.

Better

I got more out of this brief post than I did from all the time I spent reading.
From my point of view this is what we need to get us jump started. A word or two in laymans terms to get the ball rolling.

I can see "Active" speakers hitting our homes soon, the techonology is here now. Personally I am looking forward to the day you push a button and our room is fixed for good audio. I know you are way past active speakers but at least I can relate to them.

Roberts said:

Iosono is in a practical development stage and has been demonstrated. The German team has not addressed "The macro/micro volume" aspects yet but George Massenburg states he was "blown away" by the demonstration they gave. Eventually these types of rendering engines and hardware/software solutions will trickle down into the home audio arena. We are seeing the dawn of digital amplification making its way affordabally in home audio receivers. The natural evolution of reproduced audio should find a major leap in waveform propagation and construction, hopefully in our lifetime. Thinking completely "outside of the box" will be required for merging technologies to be practical in the home. I will admit the Iosono project is physically huge. To have a model that would be "home audio environment friendly", the Macro/micro volume is essential. Active acoustics, which has been implemented for over 20 years has not found its way into home audio as of yet. The concept certainly works and is being used in higher end automobiles for noise cancelling purposes. Imagine having acoustics (your walls) that have immediately changing absorbtion/reflection properties at 64 bit speed to shape the sound stream as it approaches the listener. Acceptability will "make or break" a technology to the home market place. For commercial useage, these barriers are much easier to penetrate. This is why commercial Jet airplanes were soaring above our globe with paid passengers on them over 50 years ago.

Click to expand...

TO takes this a little futher, imagine the "micro" acoustics being the rendered element of the shape and size of an actual violin, complete with bow strokes being preceived whether up or down. This would be the "explosion" aspect of acoustics. Sound emunation in all directions from a single source. Next we have the implosion effects or "macro" acoustics which is that of what we have today..loudspeakers pressurizing a room from the room boundaries. If the "macro" effect is controlled via active acoustics, then you have both pieces of the reproduction puzzle. We have been working with the "implosion" aspect since the dawn of audio. The Micro/Macro volume completes the circle of proper reproduction of sound. One must include both varibles and they both must work in unison with each other acoustically and electrically.

Seems like bandwidth is going to be a major problem with implementing anything like this. The volume of signal per second is going to be huge. Same as virtual reality; the theory's there but without the bandwidth, getting a working system that seems "real" is a bitch -- Foe

New compression schemes that can actually work for the bandwidth needed for a specific instrument at a specific time need not be 24/192 PCM quality for a singular instument that provides a rather narrow bandwidth of frequency range. For example, take the kick drum. That singular instrument needs a bandwidth in frequency of 16hz to 7Khz to be rendered "authentic" whereas other instruments such as the flute really does not need the lowest octaves to be rendered in time and space. MPeg 21 should be able to resolve up to 128 channels of audio on a DVD carrier even considering a full 20 to 20khz resolution for over 90 mins. .IF these algorithums can be rendered within a specified coverage that is practical and authentic to an actual singular instrument, then you have opened a lot of "bit" room. Also imagine only one driver/amplifier module reproduces that particular instrument for a particular part of the spherical array at the particular given instant within a mix. With multiple modules and multiple arrays, the actual mix will be done "in the air" instead of "in the speaker or electronics" which greatly lowers distortion, since a single loudspeaker cone reproducing the kick drum and the flute at the same time must have tradeoffs, not to mention the carrier, the preamp, the poweramp and even the loudspeaker cable!

Just more food for dialog.

OK, I follow that, but the bandwidth will increase with the number of sound sources that make up a recording, no? What may work well for a small jazz combo will be much harder to do with a full classical orchestra, both in the number of instruments, and the inclusion of quite a few instruments with very wide frequency ranges. Add a chorus (Beethoven's Ninth comes to mind, thank you Alex my droog) and I get a headache thinking about it -- Foe

128 channels should be adaquate for all programs considering 64 for micro and 64 for macro. Of course, if you want to cut the time back to 45 mins, (DVD-R) 256 channels could be employed. If Blu-ray were to present itself to be used as the storage medium, I see no problem whatsoever in storage. Take a look at Mpeg-21. We already have hard drives that are plenty powerful. 64 bit computers would make a cakewalk out of the rendering machines.

Don't overlook the systems compatibility with regular 2 channel audio and even mono! (exsisting formats)