Precisely! You had the right video tooInteresting. Would you mind linking that again? I'm not seeing it. Edit: I guess you're talking about this video? While looking for that, I found a really cool paper on HRTF from 5 years ago from MSResearch. It's actually pretty interesting, and covers this same stuff, and obviously was hot when they were designing Hololens.
Yes, definitely the distance between the ears is just as, if not more important than the ear shape itself, but both of those together must make for the most realistic binaural immersion due to the nature of each of our own individual acoustic perception.
Since speaker placement (and algorithm) is everything with surround sound, I cannot imagine how this would work for anything but headphones. .. If the goal of a particular case in surround sound is to place a pin drop at 3 o'clock (90° R), how would that pin sound different with a modified, ear-shape DSP? It is just the sound of that pin drop itself that needs to be replicated, not HOW you perceive that sound. Your perception does this part naturally. In order to place that sound there with headphones, yes, a stereo output with an added DSP that accommodates mapping of your personal head/ear shape should be absolutely preferable. Here's another question: if this is for surround sound, what will this sound like to a second person in the room? These facts makes me want to double down on saying that there is just no chance this actually makes any sense for normal surround sound/Stereo output.
Atmos and DTS X will still be top dog for standard 2.0-11.2 channel surround, as they are literally putting sound "objects" in an appropriate virtual location based on your personalized setup/dimensions. It should be noted that both Atmos and DTS X have headphone variants for simulated surround sound, but I don't believe that either has an added a head/ear personalization stage at this point. That's where this HRTF will probably shine.
BOTH!I'll get whichever one my mommy buys me.
BOTH!
Nah, that is what Lockhart is for. It will do everything the Series X will do less the optical disc and it will be 1440p like the Epic Unreal 5 demo. And be $100 less than the PS5.I can't imagine the XSX releasing more expensive then the PS5 they'll get destroyed.
XSX will be DOA if it's 100 more than PS5It’s all going to depend on what both companies show for games within the next couple of months, as well as the final prices for both systems.
I’m still guessing:
$499 XSX
$399 PS5
$249-$299 Lockhart
The Audio will be underutilized as usual. It won’t matter for most.
XSXX?I’ll get the XSX first. Save the best for last.
PS5 and Xbox Series X will both be 'awesome' for Unreal Engine 5
Xbox Series X won't miss out on Unreal Engine 5 performancewww.tomsguide.com
Seems confirmed that PS5 is using primitive shaders...?
XSX is definitely using mesh shaders.
View attachment 3088
View attachment 3089
PS5 and Xbox Series X will both be 'awesome' for Unreal Engine 5
Xbox Series X won't miss out on Unreal Engine 5 performancewww.tomsguide.com
Seems confirmed that PS5 is using primitive shaders...?
XSX is definitely using mesh shaders.
View attachment 3088
View attachment 3089
PS5 and Xbox Series X will both be 'awesome' for Unreal Engine 5
Xbox Series X won't miss out on Unreal Engine 5 performancewww.tomsguide.com
Seems confirmed that PS5 is using primitive shaders...?
XSX is definitely using mesh shaders.
View attachment 3088
View attachment 3089
You won't have a choice for about a year.I’ll get the XSX first. Save the best for last.
Exactly that's why colt is a terrible source.I’m not saying which is or isn’t more powerful. But I have to laugh at that article title. Sweeney says no such thing.
I’ll get the XSX first. Save the best for last.
Where do you see Colt? I see Tom's Guide.Exactly that's why colt is a terrible source.
I luv ripping his bs on forums.
Look at the post it was quotedWhere do you see Colt? I see Tom's Guide.
I agree. Don't see any mention of power differential in that article at all. Not sure what the headline is referring to...^Looks at sources and LOLZ
I did. I guess it must have been the Tweet that's not showing up correctly for me, then.Look at the post it was quoted
He's a liarI agree. Don't see any mention of power differential in that article at all. Not sure what the headline is referring to...