Imagine you are a salesperson for the hardware division of such a company. Imagine you did your work well through the entire year. How would you answer your question?
That's with a naive stereo split. Many would still put the bass on one side, with the binaural processing so it's still heard on the right, but quieter and with a tiny delay.
Hard panning isn't naive. It's just a choice that presumes an audio playback environment.
If you're listening in a room with two speakers, having widely panned sounds and limited use of reverb sounds great. The room will mix the two speakers somewhat together and add a sense of space. The result sounds like a couple of instruments playing in a room, which is sort of is.
But if you're listening with a tiny speaker directly next to each ear canal, then all of that mixing and creating a sense of space must be baked into the two audio channels themselves. You have to be more judicious with panning to avoid creating an effect that couldn't possibly be heard in a real space and add some more reverb to create a spatial environment.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding him but I think he says the music track can have hard panning, and it's the headphone playback system that should do some compensatory processing so that it sounds as if it was played on two speakers in a room.
Don't ask me how it works but I know gaming headsets try to emulate a surround setup.
Yes, these sorts of compensation features have become common on higher end headphones.
One example:
> The crossfeed feature is great for classic tracks with hard-panned mixes. It takes instruments concentrated on one channel and balances them out, creating a much more natural listening experience — like hearing the track on a full stereo system.
Your comment wasn’t wrong. Neither is the reply wrong to be frustrated about how the world understands this complex topic.
You’re talking about autism. The reply is about autism spectrum DISORDER.
Different things, exacerbated by the imprecise and evolving language we use to describe current understanding.
An individual can absolutely exhibit autistic traits, whilst also not meeting the diagnostic criteria for the disorder.
And autistic traits are absolutely a variant of normalcy. When you combine many together, and it affects you in a strongly negative way, now you meet ASD criteria.
I think a very useful term here is Broad Autism Phenotype (BAP) - subclinical ASD - you have significantly more of the traits than the average person does, but they are not strong enough or not disabling enough to merit a clinical diagnosis of ASD.
BAP is very common among (1) STEM professionals, (2) close blood relatives of people with clinical ASD (if you have a child or sibling with an ASD diagnosis, then if you yourself don’t have ASD, odds are high you have some degree of BAP), (3) people with other psychiatric diagnoses (especially those known to have a lot of overlap with ASD, e.g. ADHD, personality disorders, PTSD, OCD, eating disorders, the schizophrenia spectrum), (4) certain LGBT subgroups (especially transgender people) - all of whom have heightened odds not just of having BAP / subclinical ASD, but clinical ASD too
Like ASD, BAP skews male, but women can have it too. (The average man is a little bit more autistic than the average woman.) Also, autistic traits are positively correlated between romantic partners, so a woman in a relationship with a man with BAP or ASD is more likely to have some degree of BAP herself (as well as being more likely to have clinical ASD)
BAP itself is a matter of degree… autistic traits is a continuum and we are all somewhere on it (actually a one-dimensional continuum is a simplification, it is a multidimensional construct-but a useful simplification) - and clinicians draw a line at some point (they don’t all draw it at the same place, and its location varies across time and space and culture and even clinical subcultures) and if you are on one side of that line you have clinical ASD, if you are on the other you don’t-if you are on the non-clinical side of the line, but nearing it, you have BAP… but “nearing” it subdivides into people who are closer and people who are further away
I'm pretty sure it was that series that also described https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_droplet_radiator , with the side effects of different ships having very distinct heat patterns because of their radiator patterns. And that if a ship ever had to make a turn while they were active, big glowing arcs of slowly-cooling droplets would be flung out into space and leave a kind of heat plume.
I like to make stuff, hack on projects. I code, I woodwork, I solder, I build. I love AI in the same way I love a router and dovetail jig in the workshop.
My son and I were playing minecraft, and we wanted to build a massive egg, just for fun. (My son is 5).
We try, we fail, we try again. We start learning about spheres and how to draw circles, this is peak project-based-learning. But we still can't build an egg that looks good, and now it's becoming less fun and there's no drive to keep trying.
So I spin up claude after hours and in ~30 mins I have an parametric egg-generator in 3d space, mapped to voxels. There is no universe in which my child would be interested in the many years of training to get to the point of building this himself. I also don't have 20 hours free to learn and implement my own 3d voxel rendering systems, just to build an egg in minecraft as a silly teaching exercise.
That weekend we try to use this tool, and we see it's really hard to just see an egg model and build it, so 15 minutes later it can now show us a sliced layer-by-layer view.
The weekend, my son built a massive fucking egg in Minecraft and he's been talking about circles and radiuses and eggs and coding software ever since. He was SO excited to see that we could take a running program, something "real" in the world, and then directly change it. (And now he's trying to learn about code and graphics and stuff. Again, he's 5 - this is the passing interest of curiosity in a child, he's not studying 50-hour courses to learn low level skills)
Are you saying that's not a massive win for everyone involved?
“I don't want to live in a world where someone makes the world a better place, better than we do.”
reply