3 ms·
That would be a lot of data. Instead of a few bytes of color data per pixel per frame, you'd need a thousands of samples per second per unit of spatial resoluti
by acjohnson55 5y ago
That would be a lot of data. Instead of a few bytes of color data per pixel per frame, you'd need a thousands of samples per second per unit of spatial resolution.
Another approach to this is the Ambisonics method of capturing the directional soundfield at a point. But you'd need to use a high degree multipole expansion to get resolution anywhere closer to video.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics
- Aachen 5y agoNo, you need a few audio channels. If the algorithm can filter out what's where based on this 16 or even 4 microphone array, so can your client when provided with those sound tracks which are just a few kilobytes each. Probably all audio streams together are still less data than the video stream (given typical audio and video track quality combinations). You don't need a preprocessed stream for every point. Even if you want to keep the algorithm secret, you can have the client send the desired position to the server and do the magic there.
- acjohnson55 5y agoI think you're mostly right. If you want to be able to preserve enough bandwidth for music, you're talking about kilobytes per second of audio, but yeah, you could just store the streams from each mic in the array, so multiply the bitrate by the array size. And it's probably possible to find ways to save bandwidth with joint encoding.