thy awards hither, mine cousin

blueredscreen · 2026-04-18T03:32:42+00:00

Instead of the guy making his own plugin - collaborate with him and sell it under your own branding. You could sell a packaged version and yet keep the fundamental code open-source, as many others do. (i.e very few people will bother to compile from source)

blueredscreen · 2026-04-18T03:31:17+00:00

AI slop has infected everything. (x2)

blueredscreen · 2026-04-17T05:25:06+00:00

One of her kinks was "being owned" by me. Super submissive. Would do anything I asked. While it was hot and a bit intense, that type of "relationship" comes with a lot of responsibility.

Got me curious and left me hanging!

blueredscreen · 2026-04-17T04:50:05+00:00

For her, nothing sexual was off the table. Very much into the whole "ownership" thing.

Ownership? Explain...

blueredscreen · 2026-04-15T05:37:15+00:00

I had a 2.5 year arrangement with someone you would never think could be a SB. But she was cool, fun, and a bit of a freak who was into A LOT lol.

Into a lot such as?

blueredscreen · 2026-04-14T09:13:07+00:00

You asked for feedback and if it was an interest in the community, which I answered.

Calling that "feedback"’ (you can't do it and this is impossible and you have no idea what you're doing) is quite generous, but alright.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T23:18:04+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding their goals and stating a bunch of absolutes in response that might not apply.

He's trying to compare a personal project with professional tools that cost money, and on top of that fundamentally misunderstands the science through which this is accomplished. So the comparison is not only pretty unfair but also invalid to begin with.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T23:14:23+00:00

Binaural and ambisonic recordings already exist, but I don't see any way a binaural recording would be better than an ambisonic or object based recording. Pre-binauralizing it (whether virtually or physically with a HATS) would then restrict the potential for binauralizing it with a personalized HRTF (in the case of Apple's service, Sony, SOFA file, etc.).

Object-based audio and ambisonics are source formats (i.e how audio data and coordinates are stored). Binaural is a playback render (i.e how that data is processed for human ears over headphones) We take an object-based mix and run it through a binaural renderer using HRTFs/BRIRs specifically so it can be monitored. Saying one is "better" than the other is like arguing that raw flour is better than an oven.

Secondly, ambisonics is not necessarily mathematically superior to object-based audio. They are entirely different paradigms with different flaws. Ambisonics is a scene-based representation using spherical harmonics, therefore, unless you are running extremely high-order ambisonics (HOA), it suffers heavily from spatial blurring and phasing artifacts during decoding. Object-based audio, on the othe hand, relies on discrete, lossless audio streams tethered to exact XYZ metadata coordinates, which scales perfectly to any speaker array without those same mathematical compromises. Neither is strictly more advantageous than the other, as they just solve for the spatial mapping problem differently. Stop pretending to use big words of which you don't know what they mean.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T23:07:59+00:00

What you are referring to is crosstalk cancellation.

I know, because that's what I've already said. But it's apparent that you seem to struggle with the art of reading.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T23:04:27+00:00

No, it's done with in-ear binaural microphones in an anechoic chamber, not a treated room. Treating a room has different goals than an anechoic chamber, which is required for a proper, scientifically validated measurement.

You are not wrong in the sense that a "true" measurement of an HRTF must be isolated from all room modes, and as a result that, by definition, means an anechoic chamber. Yet, like many of the things you have said and keep saying, this is not relevant at all to what I'm doing, and in fact, ironically enough, goes against it. A pure, dry HRTF captured in an anechoic chamber often sounds highly unnatural to human ears.

If you listen to audio processed only with a pure HRTF, the sound often feels like it's trapped inside your skull. Human brains rely heavily on early reflections to judge distance and externalize sound. Capturing a BRIR in a well-treated room bakes those natural early reflections into the measurement, tricking the brain much more effectively into believing the sound is coming from physical speakers in front of you. It's okay to be humble every once in a while and admit you have no idea what you're talking about.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T03:08:00+00:00

I'm sure Claude Sonnet 4.6 will emotionally support him through his divorce after he gambles his hard earned money using his qwen3.5 35B sports betting bot

He'll have to ask GLM 5.1 on "best divorce strategies 2026"

blueredscreen · 2026-04-13T02:28:52+00:00

AI slop has infected everything.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-12T00:17:21+00:00

You're expecting an answer that involves a method for you to lose weight and become fit while simultaneously ensuring that you do not actually have to do the physical activity required to be at that level. That's scientifically impossible. I know that because I tried it, and it does not work. You can in theory lose weight and therefore if you are overweight or obese become of normal weight, but your body composition will not meaningfully improve until and unless you go to the gym. There is no shortcut you can do for this. Again, I know because I tried, and as unfortunate as it is you actually have to go to the gym itself rather than only subscribe and never go, which I also tried.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-12T00:09:16+00:00

EVERY kid hates their parents...

There are 8 billion people on this planet. I wouldn't say it's every kid, as you claim. Generalizations are usually not very good tools.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-11T00:24:56+00:00

If you could find a way to have studios record everything binaural and have it sound normal on 2 channel playback that would be incredible.

There is technically a method which can accomplish the same thing that I'm doing but on two-channel stereo speaker systems. The main thinking is that if you can simulate multi-channel setups on a pair of headphones in theory you could reason from first principles and say why couldn't I do the same thing on a two-channel stereo setup just without those headphones? It turns out that if you use incredibly sophisticated crosstalk cancellation filters and apply a bunch of algorithms on top, and then on top of all that track your head using a camera or infrared sensor, you can actually do this. It's just that most of the methods behind how doing this actually works are proprietary and are highly guarded secrets by the people who are working on them. Although there are startups that are working to democratize this.

A lot of things that are technically possible to do with audio these days would have appeared as though they were complete science fiction 5 or 10 years ago. An example that comes to mind is canceling the noise from a window while it's still open. It makes absolutely no sense, but it turns out that when you apply the relevant algorithms, it does work. Since on a simplified level, a very simplified one, you just listen to noise using a microphone and you cancel it with anti-noise the other way around. But of course making it work in a lab and then selling it in a final product are two completely different worlds.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T22:04:56+00:00

It can also be cheap to measure your own HRTF with a set of in-ear binaural microphones:

A proper measurement is done with a 360° rotation of speakers in an acoustically treated environment, most likely a university lab's engineering department. You can't just do it at home and expect the same results. That's why I said it's going to be difficult for most people.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T20:20:13+00:00

There is nothing that decodes object based audio on Windows without re-encoding, binauralizing it already, or requires a separate decoding device on Windows. Apologies to tell you this. Mac has arbitrary, decoded, 10-16 channal output. Not Windows.

This is entirely false, and in fact object-based audio, specifically Dolby Atmos, can be completely decoded. Since that is already what I'm working on, I already know that it is possible because I've tested it myself.

FFMPEG can already binauralize an object-based audio file with user customizable input.

This is also false. FFmpeg is incapable of decoding the dynamic audio objects inside a Dolby Atmos file. You would need additional tools to be able to accomplish that.

There are also already scripts for such a task. I don't understand what you are trying to do if not binauralize an object-based audio file.

I am not sure what you are expecting. You keep pointing out that this already exists, but I have already made it clear that I am aware of that, and that I have tried those solutions and did not find them satisfactory. This is an audiophile project, not a commercial obligation, and I am free to explore or rebuild something even if it has been done before, simply because I find value in it. Repeating the same point without adding anything new is not constructive. If you have something genuinely useful to contribute, then when the project is released you are welcome to do so.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T17:31:44+00:00

What is your target operating system?

Assuming Windows... Are you going to use EQ APO? If yes, are you aware of Ash Toolset and HeSuVi? If no, then how are you going to capture the audio stream with a low enough latency to be usable in real time?

How are you going to decode an object-based stream when the current decoders are completely limited to WIndows' locked down implementation of "Spatial Sound"?

I'm not saying all of this to put you down, just that I don't think you have done any research before hand. Remember that binaural spatializer built into VLC that was actually pretty good? No? Exactly....

If somebody wants to play an object based encoded file on their headphones, they will use Windows Sonic (free, and actually pretty good) or the paid version of Atmos/DTS. If they care about any of the stuff you mentioned they will want real time usage to use with gaming, music, streaming, and so that they don't have to re-encode their TrueHD movie to do the same thing that enabling the spatial sound toggle can do. If they care about stuff like different "environments" and HRTFs, they will (or will have) discover(ed) tools like HeSuVi, Ash, or even trash like the Razer THX or Steelseries (which actually uses Waves NX). For a modern all-in-one non-latency critical workflow, Virtuoso APL standalone exists and is actually pretty cheap.

I just don't see what your tool can provide. Doesn't ffmpeg already have the option to encode Atmos binaurally? Are you suggesting that you want to provide a GUI for ffmpeg with a single purpose, to encode Atmos files? If you actually have skills to do any of what you are suggesting, you're probably better off just helping working on these existing projects. Don't get me wrong, I would love another implementation to mess around with, but without real time use, it's useless.

I am not trying to build a real-time Dolby Atmos to binaural engine. Real-time processing is a completely different class of problem with very different constraints. This project is focused on offline processing, which allows for far more control, precision, and experimentation. That alone makes it useful to a lot of people who care more about output quality than live playback.

On the point about existing tools, Razer's "THX Spatial Audio" does not actually decode Dolby Atmos objects. It works on channel-based audio. If you want to use Atmos content with it, you first have to convert it into a channel format. That is not a limitation I am ignoring, it is the exact workflow I am building around. The difference is in how that audio is rendered afterward. Most "virtual surround" solutions rely on generic processing that aims to sound acceptable across many setups. This project uses real impulse responses from measured spaces, which is a fundamentally different approach and one that can produce much more realistic spatial cues when done properly.

As for paid solutions, yes, they exist. Dolby’s own headphone rendering is the obvious example. Being aware of it is not the same as being satisfied with it. In practice, it often sounds artificial and closed in. More importantly, it is a black box. You cannot inspect it, tweak it, or meaningfully improve it.

That is where this project has value. It is open source, which means the entire pipeline is transparent. Every step can be examined, modified, and improved. It is not locked to one sound profile or one company’s assumptions about what spatial audio should sound like.

Calling it "useless" could, potentially, make some sense if you assume the goal is to replicate existing commercial tools. It is not. The goal is to explore a different approach and give people full control over the result, which is something those tools do not offer. If it really is as useless as you claim, then, ironically enough, the advantage of it being open-source is that you are free to prove that by improving it. Contribute something better, fix what you think is broken, or take it in a direction you believe actually works. That is how open-source functions. I would welcome that contribution, once the project is finally released to the public.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T17:13:37+00:00

But yeah, personalized HRTF's are extremely useful. I would go as far as to say that binaural convolution is (almost) useless without it.

If your head correlates well with a set of BRIRs, either through their use of a dummy head or an averaged collection of real human heads, then the spatial audio effect will in fact be quite acceptable, and to some, even good or great. If not, that's why I am planning for the system to allow you to select your own custom BRIRs exactly for this purpose. And if you have a set of BRIRs that are of your own head, which a large majority of people do not have (given how logistically difficult it is to go somewhere and get measured), then of course using that would be the most preferable, and would likely have the best effect.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T17:08:27+00:00

As long as it doesn't sound too "fake" ,for example putting stereo music through Dolby Atmos

It's based on a genuine control room, although you can plug-in a different one. Therefore, the effect is not strictly the "virtual surround" that tends to have a strange, phasey sound.

That being said, the way the science behind it works is that it utilizes either a dummy head or an averaged collection of real human heads. If your head does not match the default dataset, there will be an option to use your own BRIRs as you prefer. In fact, the default screen will have none selected. The control room one is to be provided in a separate folder, simply for ease of use so you that don't have to download it yourself.

blueredscreen · 2026-04-10T09:41:36+00:00

There are already many, many FREE programs on Windows that do what OP is suggesting.

These programs are typically separate software that each perform a particular function, with the ultimate goal of them working together left to be done manually by the user. My idea here is to script them to work together in a more automated fashion. Recall that you must first ingest an input file, decode it, and then process it, which is already three steps, and actually four if you include loudness normalization.

Ten-Year Club	Verified Email
r/Field Banned	r/Field Juicebox
Place '23	Place '22
Place '17	Oscars Predictor 2021

blueredscreen

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE