/group?

[mzed]

ADM standards put one or more audio channels together into groups. The ADM terminology isn't ideal... and object has one or more channels and these channels could have a audioChannelFormat of DirectSpeakers (we use this for beds), Objects, or some others we're not worried about. ADM-OSC doesn't need to be a direct parallel of ADM here, since we're already using /obj to refer to what an audio engineer would consider an "object" -- a single audio channel with position data.

There's currently a proposal for group messages, like: /adm/group/3/obj/2/azm 30.0 and /adm/group/4/chan/3/azm 0.0

In the second example, a "chan" is a non-moving, DirectSpeakers, bed-type track.

[mzed]

• group seems like the right term. It’s not from ADM, but is very clear and represents something different than a bed. (ADM’s “pack” could also work, but group is much more obvious to me.) I think a music audio engineer would get it.
• Is there a need for moving position data for a whole group? Or, is it enough to assign objects to a group in a template message?
• potential confusion with object numbering in: /group/x/obj/y/… Object numbers could be by group or global. That is :/group/1/obj/1/ and /group/2/obj/1 – are they different objects (the first one in each group)?

[mzed]

This feature seems more relevant to uses cases beyond live mixing of object-based music, which is my domain. It would be great to hear from other stakeholders.

[pan-athen]

I'm coming from game audio and soundscape design in immersive formats. In interactive audio, we refer to one virtual object (a car or a player character) as an 'object' or 'source'. All game engines refer to the virtual entities as 'objects'.

'Group' sounds ok; it's a general term and, depending on the hierarchy, might or might not be perceived semantically. 'Pack' is strange in my ears, and while it means something that is packaged together, it's also connected with file packaging, formats, and codecs, sooo, I don't know.

Other engineering lingo: Stem, Source, Set, Collection, Cluster, Assembly.

I would go with 'Group' if it doesn't create any strange semantics in a text line.

Can anyone more informed than me on the nomenclature of ADM and ADM-OSC post examples of different command scenarios that we could use to substitute with a keyword to see which makes more sense? Three or five examples taken from various different cases can provide a good testing platform to check which keyword makes more sense and is the most human-readable.

[JGaudin]

As 'group' is the most obvious one, it is also a thing in the AVB-Milan world, while they are quite apart in this case, we can keep that in mind if we have to balance between different words, but I don't have much to suggest. I thought sADM had 'Cluster'?

[mzed]

Idea of heirarchy comes up again...