Re: [ARSCLIST] Slides and inconvenient media (was spin it again)

[Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 06/04/07, David Breneman wrote:

> --- Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> It is odd that "stereo" for images means having depth, from near to
>> far,
>> while "stereo" for audio means having width. All visual images have
>> width, while few audio recordings have depth.
> 
> Stereo is a greek-derived word for solidity.  Stereo images 
> and stereo sound both (at least try to) convey how things
> look and sound in the solidity of the physical world, so they
> do actually mean the same thing.
> 
My point is that they don't. A stereo image has width, height and depth.
(It is not fully 3D as it has no parallax - to get that, you need a
lenticular or holographic image.)

Most "stereo" audio has only width. A few unusually good recordings have
depth. Only experimental surround recordings (mostly using ambisonics)
have height.

Regards
-- 
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx