| Dear C sound list
I would sincerely like to thank all of you for your wonderful support
and encouragements as I wrestle with understanding computer sound
design. I feel very lucky to have acces to such a wellspring of
experienced individuals who are so willing to help and share their
knowledge.
sincerely
Pat Pagano, Director
South East Just Intonation Society
Gainesville Florida
Resonate and Extenuate
p.s. please continue to send me all delay/reverb examples you can!!hah
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04571;
6 May 99 19:23 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fSo9-0000Km-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 19:23:41 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA03263); Thu, 6 May 1999 19:19:42 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 19:19:30 +0100
Received: from farida.a2000.nl [62.108.1.19] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA01281); Thu, 6 May 1999 19:19:29 +0100 (BST)
Received: from node115c1.a2000.nl ([24.132.21.193] helo=dds.nl)
by smtp1.a2000.nl with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #4)
id 10fSk4-0005Wj-00
for csound@maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:19:28 +0200
Message-ID: <37309AAD.8413B986@dds.nl>
Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 20:23:26 +0100
From: Fokke de Jong
Reply-To: f_dejong@dds.nl
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: 24 bit?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
hi,
I'm having some trouble using the 'rescale to 24 bit' function in
Csound. This doesn't seem to write the right header (i.e. it writes a
16-bit header). Does anyone else have this problem?
Just for the record, I'm using the 3.51 Macintosh version.
cheers, Fokke.
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04604;
6 May 99 19:48 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fTCN-0000LA-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 19:48:43 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA10321); Thu, 6 May 1999 19:45:28 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 19:45:17 +0100
Received: from angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112] by hermes via SMTP (TAA08737); Thu, 6 May 1999 19:45:16 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 29203 invoked from network); 6 May 1999 20:45:15 +0200
Received: from du123-91.ppp.algonet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.91.123)
by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 6 May 1999 20:45:15 +0200
From: Anders Andersson
To: The CSound mailinglist
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 20:45:42 +0200
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: YAM 2.0Preview7 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch
Subject: Optimizations
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Ho!
I've read about the optimization discussion going on..
Yesterday when browsing through some old books at the university-library
(where I work) I found a horrifying example on how things can go wrong when
you try to optimize "by the book", and have old books..
It was an algorithm that used 8 muls, but they "optimized" it to "only" 7
muls and 11 adds.
This would be great, if the CPU would perform 11 adds quicker than 1 mul, as
was the case pre 1990.
Nowadays (post 1990), that code would be more than twice as slow as the
"unoptimized", as todays CPU's are VERY optimized for multiplications, so
that a mul is almost faster than an add.
I guess there might be alot of this examples deep down in the code for the
most "basic" (and thus oldest) opcodes in CSound, as indeed, it was a very
common way to optimize on a few years ago. (The famous Bresenham DDA
linedrawer is a very good example!)
// Anders (That still uses a CPU dated pre 1990 (MC68030), thus the mul's
are about 10 times slower than the add's =D)
Received: from wallace.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04637;
6 May 99 20:04 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by wallace.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fTRM-0000O5-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:04:12 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA00760); Thu, 6 May 1999 20:01:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 20:01:25 +0100
Received: from jaguars-int.cableinet.net [193.38.113.9] by hermes via SMTP (UAA14737); Thu, 6 May 1999 20:01:24 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 6316 invoked from network); 6 May 1999 18:57:21 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cableinet.co.uk) (194.117.146.164)
by jaguars with SMTP; 6 May 1999 18:57:21 -0000
Message-ID: <3731E7A1.5A4F693E@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 20:04:01 +0100
From: Richard Dobson
Organization: Composers Desktop Project
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Csound List
Subject: Re: tempo
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
As Eric Scheirer hasn't picked up on this question (yet), hopefully he
won't mind if I mention his research into just this problem:
http://sound.media.mit.edu/~eds/beat/
He is now making the source-code available for non-commercial research
purposes: from his recent post to the music-dsp list:
"The code is available at
http://sound.media.mit.edu/~eds/beat/tapping.tar.gz
for research purposes only. You're free to use the code for your
personal experiments or for research work, but if you want to
incorporate
it in a product, you have to license it from MIT (this could be free,
but we'd have to go through the formality). Please credit me if you
do follow-on work using the software."
Richard Dobson
Dew Drops wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of a program or something that's been written that can
> take in a piece of music and determine it's tempo ?
>
> Drew
>
--
Test your DAW with my Soundcard Attrition Page!
http://wkweb5.cableinet.co.uk/rwd
CDP homepage: http://www.bath.ac.uk/~masjpf/CDP/CDP.htm
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04885;
6 May 99 22:10 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fVPb-0000O3-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 22:10:31 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (WAA06918); Thu, 6 May 1999 22:06:27 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Thu, 6 May 1999 22:06:16 +0100
Received: from adsl-209-78-185-158.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [209.78.185.158] by hermes via ESMTP (WAA03625); Thu, 6 May 1999 22:06:14 +0100 (BST)
Received: from screech.weirdnoise.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by screech.weirdnoise.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id OAA10941;
Thu, 6 May 1999 14:08:06 -0700
Message-Id: <199905062108.OAA10941@screech.weirdnoise.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2
To: Anders Andersson
cc: The CSound mailinglist
Subject: Re: Optimizations
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 06 May 1999 20:45:42 +0200."
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 14:08:06 -0700
From: Ed Hall
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
On Thu, 06 May 1999 20:45:42 you wrote:
> . . .
> Yesterday when browsing through some old books at the university-library
> (where I work) I found a horrifying example on how things can go wrong when
> you try to optimize "by the book", and have old books..
> . . .
Absolutely true! Counting instruction cycles is no longer the way to
optimize. Main memory is only about 2.5 times faster than it was ten
years ago, while CPU's are 25 times faster. As you note, some
instructions (like multiply) have been sped up even more. Optimizations
have to focus on the cache architecture and the wide range of latencies
between level one and two (and sometimes level three) cache and main
memory. Since a single 64K Csound function table or 1.5 second delay
will completely fill most PC's cache, main memory latency affects Csound
more than most applications.
The CPU/memory ratio has shifted so far that optimizations that were
common a few years ago, such as using lookup tables to avoid complex
calculations, can actually slow programs down. Nonlinear waveshapers
take note: it might be faster to compute your polynomial directly
(though Csound has a high enough per-operation overhead that this
likely isn't true for a coded expression, but would be for a polynomial
opcode).
-Ed
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05124;
7 May 99 0:51 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fXvQ-0000Qf-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 00:51:32 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (AAA12112); Fri, 7 May 1999 00:49:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 00:49:06 +0100
Received: from ella.mills.edu [144.91.3.20] by hermes via SMTP (AAA14051); Fri, 7 May 1999 00:49:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 1448520 invoked by uid 1964); 6 May 1999 16:48:18 -0700
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 16:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Matt J. Ingalls"
Reply-To: "Matt J. Ingalls"
To: Fokke de Jong
cc: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: 24 bit?
In-Reply-To: <37309AAD.8413B986@dds.nl>
Message-ID:
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
> I'm having some trouble using the 'rescale to 24 bit' function in
> Csound. This doesn't seem to write the right header (i.e. it writes a
> 16-bit header). Does anyone else have this problem?
what are you using to read the 24 bit file? (csound doesnt support
24-bit-in!)
-matt
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05463;
7 May 99 4:54 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fbiT-0000UJ-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 04:54:25 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (EAA17528); Fri, 7 May 1999 04:51:26 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 04:51:14 +0100
Received: from popeye.latrobe.edu.au [131.172.4.60] by hermes via ESMTP (EAA10074); Fri, 7 May 1999 04:51:11 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [131.172.160.53] (hu2-322.media.latrobe.edu.au [131.172.160.53]) by popeye.latrobe.edu.au (8.8.6/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA10794 for ; Fri, 7 May 1999 13:51:08 +1000 (EST)
X-Sender: mustpm@pop.latrobe.edu.au
Message-Id:
In-Reply-To: <199905062108.OAA10941@screech.weirdnoise.com>
References: Your message of "Thu, 06 May 1999 20:45:42 +0200."
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 13:53:20 +1000
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
From: Terry McDermott
Subject: Re: Optimizations
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>On Thu, 06 May 1999 20:45:42 you wrote:
>> . . .
>> Yesterday when browsing through some old books at the university-library
>> (where I work) I found a horrifying example on how things can go wrong when
>> you try to optimize "by the book", and have old books..
>> . . .
>
>Absolutely true! Counting instruction cycles is no longer the way to
>optimize. Main memory is only about 2.5 times faster than it was ten
>years ago, while CPU's are 25 times faster. As you note, some
>instructions (like multiply) have been sped up even more. Optimizations
>have to focus on the cache architecture and the wide range of latencies
>between level one and two (and sometimes level three) cache and main
>memory. Since a single 64K Csound function table or 1.5 second delay
>will completely fill most PC's cache, main memory latency affects Csound
>more than most applications.
>
>The CPU/memory ratio has shifted so far that optimizations that were
>common a few years ago, such as using lookup tables to avoid complex
>calculations, can actually slow programs down. Nonlinear waveshapers
>take note: it might be faster to compute your polynomial directly
>(though Csound has a high enough per-operation overhead that this
>likely isn't true for a coded expression, but would be for a polynomial
>opcode).
>
> -Ed
I have a hazy recollection that there is some programming trick often used
by engineers to generate a sine wave in real time (calculate the values on
the fly, rather than accessing lookup tables) which calculates the locus of
a circle in the imaginary z plane, and voila there is a sinusoidal behavior
on the real axis. If this recollection is correct, then maybe this could be
an alternative way of making sine waves in csound, and given the speed of
CPUs these days as opposed to memory access, perhaps a more efficient
method?? Maybe its already been done?
--Terry
Terry McDermott
Music Department
School of Arts & Media
Latrobe University
Bundoora, Victoria, 3083
Australia
email: T.McDermott@latrobe.edu.au
Telephone +61 3 9479 2167
Fax +61 3 9479 3651
Received: from shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05645;
7 May 99 7:13 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by shaun.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fdtH-0000VM-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 07:13:43 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (HAA01786); Fri, 7 May 1999 07:11:32 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 07:11:18 +0100
Received: from hromeo.algonet.se [194.213.74.10] by hermes via SMTP (HAA14180); Fri, 7 May 1999 07:11:17 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 12023 invoked from network); 7 May 1999 08:11:17 +0200
Received: from du84-90.ppp.algonet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.90.84)
by hromeo.algonet.se with SMTP; 7 May 1999 08:11:17 +0200
From: Anders Andersson
To: The CSound mailinglist
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 08:11:43 +0200
Message-ID:
X-Mailer: YAM 2.0Preview7 [020] - Amiga Mailer by Marcel Beck - http://www.yam.ch
Subject: (OT!) Bandpass
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Hello!
I'm quite a newbie with electronics, but I still would like to try some
things out..
For a project I need a *very* narrow BP-filter (fixed frequency, but still
adjustable so that I could have several modules with different frequency).
It does not have to be "noisefree".
Is it possible to construct in many ways, or are there some general rule you
always use when building BP-filters?
What would be the best way in this case?
(I want to know what things I should read moe about, and what I can skip)
// Anders
Received: from wallace.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa05882;
7 May 99 9:45 BST
Received: from [144.173.6.14] (helo=exeter.ac.uk)
by wallace.maths.bath.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #1)
id 10fgGJ-0000lF-00
for jpff@maths.bath.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 09:45:39 +0100
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (JAA00380); Fri, 7 May 1999 09:43:06 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exeter.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Fri, 7 May 1999 09:42:48 +0100
Received: from law2-f121.hotmail.com [216.32.181.121] by hermes via SMTP (JAA11044); Fri, 7 May 1999 09:42:47 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 86542 invoked by uid 0); 7 May 1999 08:44:34 -0000
Message-ID: <19990507084434.86541.qmail@hotmail.com>
Received: from 129.78.64.2 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP;
Fri, 07 May 1999 01:44:34 PDT
X-Originating-IP: [129.78.64.2]
From: Andrew Lyons
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: pvanel file format
Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 18:44:34 EST
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed;
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Hi!
Majordomo asked me to say hi! and refer you to my web page . . .
Can anyone provide some description of the file format that pvanel writes
out? Id like to try reading them from another unix mounted application.
Thanks in advance
====================================================================
Andrew Lyons - 4D - A/V | alyons@vislab.usyd.edu.au | 61 2 9351 1889
Time - Space - Texture | http://www.vislab.usyd.edu.au/user/alyons
====================================================================
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com |