OmniAudio: Spatial Audio from 360° Video

• OmniAudio is a framework that synthesizes First-Order Ambisonics audio from 360° videos by leveraging dual-branch video encoding and spatial VAE components.
• It utilizes the large-scale Sphere360 dataset and a self-supervised flow-matching strategy to significantly enhance spatial realism and audio fidelity.
• The approach is applicable in VR, immersive film, gaming, and telepresence, though challenges remain in handling complex acoustic environments.

OmniAudio is a framework for generating spatial First-Order Ambisonics (FOA) audio from 360-degree (panoramic) video, devised to advance the spatial realism and directional accuracy of automatically generated audio for immersive audiovisual environments. Centered around the 360V2SA (360-Degree-Video-to-Spatial-Audio) task, OmniAudio introduces both a large-scale paired dataset (Sphere360) and a dual-branch, self-supervised model architecture that collectively achieve state-of-the-art performance on spatial audio synthesis benchmarks.

1. Task Definition: 360V2SA and FOA Representation

The 360V2SA task formalizes the problem of synthesizing spatially accurate audio from omnidirectional video:

• Input: A panoramic 360° video sequence, denoted $V_{360}$.
• Output: A multi-channel (FOA) audio signal $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$.

FOA audio encodes 3D directionality via first-order real spherical harmonics:

$$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$

where $\theta$ is elevation and $\phi$ is azimuth. Using this encoding, FOA supplies per-sample full-sphere source localization, supporting downstream interactive spatial rendering (e.g., with head-tracked VR systems).

2. Sphere360 Dataset: Construction Methodology and Content

The Sphere360 dataset is specifically constructed for 360V2SA:

• Scale and Content: 103,000 video-audio pairs, each 10 seconds, aggregating approximately 288 hours and 288 distinct semantic event classes.
• Semi-Automated Collection Pipeline:
  • Frame Stationarity: Clips with over 85% near-identical frames, as measured by MSE,

  $$\text{MSE} = \frac{1}{HW} \sum_{i=1}^{H} \sum_{j=1}^{W} \left(I_t(i,j) - I_{t+1}(i,j)\right)^2,$$

  are removed. - Silent Audio Detection: Segment-based $\text{dBFS}=20\log_{10}(p/p_{\max})$, discarding those with >90% below –35 dBFS. - Speech-Heavy Clips: Speech detector (SenseVoice); exclusion if >5 spoken words detected per clip. - Audio–Video Mismatch: Cross-modal similarity below 1 by ImageBind embedding leads to exclusion. 4. Manual Inspection: Ensures absence of artifacts and spurious pairs.

Following the above, from an initial 166,500 candidates, 103,000 high-quality pairs remain in the final dataset.

3. OmniAudio Model Architecture

OmniAudio encompasses three principal computational components, each contributing to spatially and semantically coherent audio generation.

A. Dual-Branch Video Encoding

• Global (Panoramic) Branch: Processes the raw equirectangular panorama $V_{360}$ into temporal feature vectors $f_g \in \mathbb{R}^{T \times D}$ using MetaCLIP-Huge backbone.

• Local (FoV) Branch: Converts central perspective crops ($V_{\mathrm{FOV}}$) into parallel feature vectors $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$0.

• Fusion: Both representations are integrated via cross-attention within a Diffusion Transformer (DiT), preserving complementary global and local, perspective-invariant spatial cues.

B. FOA Audio Variational Autoencoder (Spatial VAE)

• Encoder: Maps 4-channel FOA waveform $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$1 to a latent sequence $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$2.

• Decoder: Reconstructs FOA waveform from $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$3.

• Objective:

$\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$4

enforcing accurate multi-channel reconstruction and regularized latent structure.

C. Self-Supervised Flow-Matching Pre-training

• Latent Path Interpolation: Between noisy prior $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$5 and ground-truth latent $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$6,

$\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$7

with target velocity $\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$8.

• Flow-Matching Loss:

$\mathbf{a}(t) = [W(t), X(t), Y(t), Z(t)]^\top$9

applied conditionally on video context $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$0.

• Coarse-to-Fine Curriculum:
  • Coarse: Train by masking random spans in non-spatial large-audio latents to capture global audio priors.
  • Fine: Specialize on unmasked FOA latents, refining spatial cue sensitivity.

D. Spatial-Aware Supervised Fine-Tuning and Inference

• Supervised Conditioning: Loss from flow matching is conditioned on both video branches $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$1 and audio latent $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$2.
• Inference: The conditional ODE

$$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$3

is solved from noise to posterior, with final waveform reconstruction $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$4.

4. Empirical Evaluation: Metrics and Results

A. Evaluation Metrics

• Non-Spatial Quality: Fréchet Distance (FD) over OpenL3 embeddings and KL divergence on AudioSet-derived tags.
• Spatial Accuracy:
  • Spatial indices:

  $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$5

  with angular error measures

  $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$6

  and reporting $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$7, $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$8, and $$\begin{aligned} W(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^0_0(\theta,\phi) = \tfrac{1}{2\sqrt\pi}, \ X(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{-1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\cos\phi, \ Y(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{0}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\sin\theta\sin\phi, \ Z(\theta,\phi) &\propto Y^{1}_1(\theta,\phi) = \sqrt{\tfrac{3}{4\pi}}\,\cos\theta. \end{aligned}$$9.

• Subjective Evaluation: MOS-SQ (subjective quality) and MOS-AF (audio fidelity), both in mean opinion score scale with 95% CIs.

B. Performance Benchmarks

Model	FD ↓	KL ↓	Δ_ang ↓	MOS-SQ ↑	MOS-AF ↑
Diff-Foley + AS	331.1	3.56	–	69.9±0.8	71.1±1.4
MMAudio + AS	271.2	2.39	–	75.3±1.0	77.6±1.2
ViSAGe (FOV)	210.9	2.90	1.49	73.5±1.4	74.9±1.7
ViSAGe (360)	219.7	2.96	1.51	74.1±1.2	75.3±1.0
OmniAudio (ours)	88.3	1.58	1.28	84.7±1.1	87.2±1.0

OmniAudio achieves substantial improvements across Fréchet Distance, KL divergence, angular spatial error, and both MOS metrics, demonstrating both enhanced spatial plausibility and overall audio quality on Sphere360-Bench.

C. Ablation Analyses

Variant	FD ↓	KL ↓	Δ_ang ↓
no pre-training	104.6	1.83	1.32
coarse only	97.3	1.78	1.30
fine only	97.6	1.82	1.28
coarse-to-fine	88.3	1.58	1.28

The full coarse-to-fine pre-training yields the most consistent gains. For encoders,

• FOV-only: FD=88.8, KL=1.87, Δ_ang=1.33
• ERP-only: FD=97.8, KL=1.87, Δ_ang=1.28
• Combined (dual-branch): 88.3, 1.58, 1.28

This suggests information from both panoramic and perspective cues enhances spatial inference.

5. Applications and Limitations

Applications

• Virtual Reality / 360° Video Playback: Enables dynamic, spatially accurate sound fields mapped to immersive visuals, supporting interactive head-tracking.
• Immersive Film and Gaming: Simplifies production by automating the creation of spatial soundtracks, eliminating manual FOA mixing.
• Telepresence and Remote Collaboration: Provides realistic 3D sound reproduction from wide-angle acquisition, improving user experience and source localization in remote interactions.

Limitations

• Complex Acoustic Environments: In scenes with numerous simultaneous sources, the model may be less effective at disambiguating spatial cues.
• Dataset Diversity: Current Sphere360 coverage (288 classes, ~100k clips) provides diverse but not exhaustive real-world variation. Generalization to novel or rare environments may be constrained.

6. Prospects and Research Directions

Future directions center on extending the utility and expressiveness of the OmniAudio framework:

• Dataset Expansion: Ongoing semi-automated acquisition aims to augment coverage and semantic variation within Sphere360.
• Higher-Order Spatial Encoding: Adapting models for higher-order ambisonics would enable finer angular resolution in audio generation.
• Explicit Multisource Disentanglement: Investigating object-sound correspondence could allow for source separation, better handling of dense acoustic scenes, and facilitating downstream applications in audio-visual scene analysis.

A plausible implication is that incorporating explicit visual-audio correspondence modeling and further scaling up both data and model capacity may broaden applicability across more challenging real-world 360° scenes.