INTERCHANGE FORMATS FOR SPATIAL AUDIO

Stephen Travis Pope

FASTLab Inc. & HeavenEverywhere Media
Santa Barbara, California USA
[email protected]

ABSTRACT
Space has been a central parameter in electroacoustic
music composition and performance since its origins.
Nevertheless, the design of a standardized interchange
format for spatial audio performances is a complex task
that poses a diverse set of constraints and problems.
This position paper attempts to describe the current state
of the art in terms of what can be called easy today,
and what areas pose as-yet unsolved technical or theoretical problems. The paper ends with a set of comments
on the process of developing a widely useable spatial
sound interchange format.
1. INTRODUCTION
The first known electrically mediated spatial audio performance used Clement Adlers 80-channel spatial telephone and took place at the international exhibition in
Paris in 1881. In the 20th century, the development of
multi-channel sound recording/reproduction techniques
and equipment was carried out in parallel with the evolution of electroacoustic music composition and synthesis hardware/software. It is interesting to note that John
Chownings seminal paper on the simulation of moving
sound sources [1] predates his more-widely-cited FM
synthesis paper. [2] - [4] also present early results beyond which we have progressed very little in theory, and
arguably even in practice.
It is quite unfortunate that there have been only very
weak and short-lived standards for state-of-the-art multichannel audio transmission or performance that went
beyond the then-current state-of-the-market standards.
(Most of the computer music in my collection is on stereo CDs, with a few newer pieces on 5.1-channel
DVDs.) Furthermore, there are no standards for even the
simplest of extensions, such as the channel-to-speaker
assignment for the playback of 4-channel quadrophonic
material.
The current state-of-the-market distribution formats
are either high-sample-rate, high-resolution (96 KHz,
24-bit) stereo audio (e.g., DVD/A format or
www.MusicGiants.com downloads), or CD-format
5.1-channel surround sound. Current DVD playback
hardware does not even have adequate bandwidth to
play back uncompressed high-resolution surround sound
data.
In order to foster the distribution of higher-spatialfidelity audio, the community naturally seeks to establish a standardized interchange format for 3D- spatial
audio scenes. Whether (and to what extent) this format
will also be appropriate for use in real-time distributed
systems, and how it should provide links for real-time
interaction and multimedia synchronization remain open
(and interesting) questions.

2. THE CURRENT STATE

A system that allows the interchange of spatial audio
between different hardware systems would necessarily
consist of (at least) a content editor for creating spatial
audio performances, the interchange format itself (file,
metadata or stream), and one or more renderers for the
chosen spatialization techniques and many-channel output playback/recording formats.
There are three spatial sound rendering techniques that
have found wide application in electroacoustic music:
(1) vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP), (2) Ambisonics, and (3) wavefield synthesis (WFS) (see [5] for
complete references). Each of these make different assumptions about the nature of the sound sources, the
existence and impact of a simulated room and the
features of the listener.
The plentiful software systems for spatial audio performance (see the recent ICMC Proceedings, or those of
the special-topic AES workshops), generally adopt exactly one of these processing techniques, and implement
it in their output stage (the spatial sound renderer). The
two systems reported in the literature support more than
one renderer by providing a renderer-independent intermediate layer are the SoundScapeRenderer (SSR) [6]
developed at Deutsche Telkom Labs is one, and the CSL
system [7] developed by our group at UCSB. Jorge Castellanos, Doug McCoy, Lance Putnam, Graham Wakefield, and Will Wollcott all contributed to this system
and used it in their thesis projects. CSL currently supports all three of the rendering techniques listed above,
as well as binaural playback over headphones using
HRTF-derived filters, and we have evaluated its performance and scalability in a variety of distributed systems, including the UCSB AlloSphere [5].
3. WHATS EASY?
The history of spatial audio production includes a number of systems that simulate point sound sources with
2-D or 3-D positions, which can be represented as Cartesian (x, y, z) or polar (radius, azimuth, elevation) positions relative to a stationary origin (often chosen to be
the middle of the ideal listeners head).
Moving sound sources can be simulated using a variety of techniques, and the motion itself can be described
using source trajectories represented as time-stamped
geometry updates. The renderer can optionally perform
source position interpolation. Graphical editors for
source positions have been built going back to the late
1970s [1] - [3].
Using the client/server model, a distributed system
can easily be built that streams sampled audio (e.g.,
using RTP or SDIF as the interchange protocol) in parallel with control-rate geometry updates (e.g., using
OSC) from synthesis and interaction clients to a spatial

sound rendering server. Given such a system, one could

simply store the audio and control streams along with
the time-stamp information necessary to correlate them
(possibly along with other metadata), and call this combination an interchange format for spatial audio scenes.
More complex renderers might choose to model
sources with orientations as well, enabling directional,
frequency-dependent source radiation patterns.
It is also a solved problem to compute early reflections based on a desired room model stored as a set of
surfaces.
4. WHATS HARD?
The bulk of the recent research literature has concentrated on technical problems that are specific to each of
the three standard rendering techniques, rather than on
higher-level and cross-domain issues. Aside from these
issues, and from those that arise in building rendereragnostic middle-stage processing, there are still several
areas that pose problems in this area.
The modeling and processing of diffuse and distributed sound sources is largely unaddressed, save in systems that allow for unspatialized global sources.
The visualization of, and interaction with, true dynamic spatial audio scenes (including, of course, dynamic rooms within these scenes) is still difficult.
Spatial audio playback over low-channel-order systems (e.g., stereo loudspeakers or headphones) is an
active areas of research, with techniques for both output
formats being developed. This is more a renderer issue
than an interchange format issue.
Lastly, Developers in several application areas have
had to confront the scalability issues that arise when
one wants to support many sources, many output channels, or rapid source movement. The performance can
be characterized in terms of compute-load, network
bandwidth, and distributability (coupling between servers) [5]. The common rendering techniques have quite
different performance degradation behavior, though this
is also a renderer implementation issue rather than an
interchange format issue. We can, for example, generalize about the scaling of VBAP vs. Ambisonics for the
support of many output channels, since VBAP would
require a dynamic network in which sources are
switched between servers each processing a geometrical
region of the output space, whereas with Ambisonics the
same Nth-order channel buffers are streamed from the
encoders to the decoders.
5. WHATS TO DO?
Given the fact that I included an interchange format for
spatial audio scenes in the section on whats easy
above, the question arises of why we are even discussing it any more. The answer is that there are a number of
unanswered questionssome related to the models that
should underly said interchange format, and some related to the storage and processing of data store using
the format.
The models that are required include minimally:
monophonic sound source with position, orientation,
and directional and frequency-dependent radiation
pattern; and
room with wall characteristics and listener position.
The first model would include enough metadata to
allow the renderer to locate or connect to the (live or

stored) sound source sample stream, and to position and

orient the source in its virtual space. The second model
allows the renderer to compute the simple processing
parameters (using the listener position data), and (optionally) to configure one or more reverberators based
on the simulated room and source/listener geometry.
In the degenerate case, this could all be stored in an
extended-format AIFF, SDIF, OSC, or XML file. (We
already have the data structures in CSL [6]). There are
several concrete proposals for this in the references of
the other panel papers.
We should develop a survey the systems that use related formats (WONDER, HRTF-players, SpatDIF,
MPEG-4, X3D, OpenAL, VRML, etc.) to refine our
base set of requirements and feature set ideas.
The challenges come when one tries to offer true
renderer-independence while supporting the features
that are natural for each of the well-known rendering
techniques (e.g., plane wave sources on WFS or loworder sources in mixed-order Ambisonics). Nevertheless, any of the pre-existing proposals could serve as the
basis of a request-for-comment aimed at establishing a
more widely used standard interchange format for spatial audio content.
6. CONCLUSIONS
It will be obvious to the reader that this paper takes a
very pragmatic and low-level approach, and that this
must be merged with the higher-level perspective based
on auditory spatial schemata as is offered by the other
panel participants. In this respect, the current contribution is more in line with the renderer-agnostic declarative 3D audio formats that have arisen in the game development and ICAD communities. Our own work at
UCSB is centered on the provision of a flexible distributed interactive software framework for a very-largescale spatial audio rendering system in the UCSB AlloSphere space.
7. REFERENCES
[1] Chowning, J. M. The Simulation of Moving
Sound Sources. JAES 19(1): 2-6; 1971.
reprinted in CMJ, 1(3) 48-52, 1977.
[2] Moore, F. R. A General Model for Spatial
Processing of Sounds. CMJ, 7(6): 6-15, 1983.
[3] Moorer, J. A. About this Reverberation
Business. CMJ, 3(2):13-28, 1979.
[4] Moore, F. R., M. V. Mathews, and J. R. Pierce.
Spatialization of Sounds over Loudspeakers.
In Current Directions in Computer Music
Research. Cambridge, MIT Press, 1989.
[5] Amatriain, X., T Hllerer, J. Kuchera-Morin,
and S. T. Pope. Immersive Audio and Music
in the AlloSphere. Proc ICMC. 2007.
[6] M. Geier, et al. The SoundScape Renderer: A
versatile software framework for spatial audio
reproduction. In Proc WFS Workshop,
Ilmenau, Germany, Sept. 2007.
[7] Pope, S. T. and C. Ramakrishnan. The
CREATE Signal Library (Sizzle): Design,
Issues, and Applications. Proc ICMC 2003.
See also http://FASTLabInc.com/CSL