| Code Spaz wrote:
>
> ......
> I was hoping you'd catch the other apparent typos in here... you use the
> args xamp and xpitch for the 'prototype' at the top, then in the body, you
> use 'kamp' and kpitch'. This was confusing at first, until you posted the
> example which uses the latter notation as well.
> The 'x' is important to signify that these args can be init, k-rate, or
> a-rate; is it not?
Yes, the x is used in documentation to indicate that any of i/k/a is valid,
but x is of course not itself a valid variable type.
"In the body", you mean in discussion of kampoff/kpitchoff?
Yes - I just copied these. Lack of focus as usual. Also a mixup of igfn/iwfn
at one point. I've renamed iwfn to ienvfn for clarity now (more in keeping
with source code variable name too).
The below version should be better.
re
*********** NEWer DOC FOR grain OPCODE (April 13 1998 version) **************
ar grain xamp, xpitch, xdens, kampoff, kpitchoff, kgdur, igfn, ienvfn, imgdur [, igrnd]
Generates granular synthesis textures.
INITIALISATION
igfn - The ftable number of the grain waveform. This can be just a sine wave or a sampled sound.
ienvfn - Ftable number of the amplitude envelope used for the grains (see also GEN20).
imgdur - Maximum grain duration in seconds. This the biggest value to be assigned to kgdur.
igrn - (optional) if non-zero, turns off grain offset randomness. This means that all grains will start reading from the beginning of the igfn table. If zero (the default), grains will start reading from random igfn table positions.
PERFORMANCE
xamp - Amplitude of each grain.
xpitch - Grain pitch. To use the original frequency of the input sound, use the formula
sndsr / ftlen(igfn)
where sndsr is the original sample rate of the igfn sound.
xdens - Density of grains measured in grains per second. If this is constant then the output is synchronous granular synthesis, very similar to fof. If xdens has a random element (like added noise), then the result is more like asynchronous granular synthesis.
kampoff - Maximum amplitude deviation from xamp. The maximum amplitude a grain can have is xamp + kampoff and the minimum is xamp. If kampoff is set to zero then there is no random amplitude for each grain.
kpitchoff - Maximum pitch deviation from xpitch in cps. Similar to kampoff.
kgdur - Grain duration in seconds. The maximum value for this should be declared in imgdur. If kgdur at any point becomes greater than imgdur, it will be truncated to imgdur.
EXAMPLE
A texture with gradually shortening grains, and widening amp and pitch spread
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; graintest.orc
instr 1
ienvfn = 5 ; Hanning window
insnd = 10 ; Sound file
ibasfrq = 32000 / ftlen(insnd) ; Use original sample rate of insnd file
kamp expseg 8000, p3/2, 8000, p3/2, 16000
kpitch line ibasfrq, p3, ibasfrq * .8
kdens line 600, p3, 200
kaoff line 0, p3, 5000
kpoff line 0, p3, ibasfrq * .5
kgdur line .4, p3, .1
imaxgdur = .5
ar grain kamp, kpitch, kdens, kaoff, kpoff, kgdur, insnd, ienvfn, imaxgdur, 0.0
out ar
endin
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; graintest.sco
f5 0 512 20 2 ; Hanning window
f10 0 65536 1 "Sound.wav" 0 0 0
i1 0 10
e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22674;
13 Apr 98 14:14 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa28652;
13 Apr 98 14:14 BST
Received: (qmail 3186 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 11:40:52 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 11:40:52 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (MAA19045); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:38:07 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 12:37:37 +0100
Received: from condor.CC.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.103] by hermes via ESMTP (MAA23525); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:37:31 +0100 (BST)
Received: from eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA (eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.70]) by condor.CC.UMontreal.CA with ESMTP id HAA17423
(8.6.11/IDA-1.6); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 07:37:34 -0400
Received: from mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA (mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.73])
by eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA11503;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 07:37:31 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ere.umontreal.ca (whisky-03.CC.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.203])
by mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA18982;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 07:37:24 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3531F84B.D971490D@ere.umontreal.ca>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 07:34:35 -0400
From: Jean Piche
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; IRIX 6.3 IP32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Mike Berry , csound
Subject: Re: Looking towards v3.48
References: <35316AD7.8B388E8@nmol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Mike Berry wrote:
>
> A comment here on rand. The period of rand in csound on most platforms is
> 65536, or less than 2 seconds of white noise at 44.1 kHz. The repeating is audible.
> I have code for a random number generator which will repeat for most seeds
> about every 1 billion years at 44.1 kHz. The low end is about 100000 years.
> I would be happy to pass this on to jpff. The question is: Do we replace rand
> with the new code or make it a new ugen, to preserve the flawed character of
> rand for old scores?
Yes Please! My vote is to scrap the old. Question: Would this be adaptable to
randi and randh as well?
--
________________________________________________________
Jean Piche
Universite de Montreal
http://mistral.ere.umontreal.ca/~pichej
http://www.musique.umontreal.ca/electro/CEC/
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22770;
13 Apr 98 15:04 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa01385;
13 Apr 98 15:04 BST
Received: (qmail 23973 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 14:04:41 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 14:04:41 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (PAA00181); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:00:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 15:00:05 +0100
Received: from mail1.c-bridge.com [199.93.167.8] by hermes via ESMTP (OAA03211); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 14:59:57 +0100 (BST)
Received: by MAIL1.c-bridge.com with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
id <26MKC3BH>; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:01:24 -0400
Message-Id: <07A89ECA8CA1D111ADF800A0C999D989024AD7@MAIL1.c-bridge.com>
From: Grant Covell
To: 'Mike Berry' , csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: RE: Looking towards v3.48--rand
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:01:21 -0400
X-Priority: 3
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Please keep both. The periodicity of the old rand is useful for creating
some textures (and for old scores), the new rand is killer for appearing
truly random.
Grant
gcovell@c-bridge.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Berry [SMTP:mikeb@nmol.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 1998 9:31 PM
> To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Looking towards v3.48
>
> A comment here on rand. The period of rand in csound on most
> platforms is
> 65536, or less than 2 seconds of white noise at 44.1 kHz. The
> repeating is audible.
> I have code for a random number generator which will repeat for
> most seeds
> about every 1 billion years at 44.1 kHz. The low end is about 100000
> years.
> I would be happy to pass this on to jpff. The question is: Do we
> replace rand
> with the new code or make it a new ugen, to preserve the flawed
> character of
> rand for old scores?
> --
> Mike Berry
> mikeb@nmol.com
> http://www.nmol.com/users/mikeb
>
>
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22789;
13 Apr 98 15:07 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa01649;
13 Apr 98 15:06 BST
Received: (qmail 12942 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 14:06:51 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 14:06:51 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (PAA02567); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:02:59 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 15:02:24 +0100
Received: from root@unix.tfs.net [199.79.146.60] by hermes via ESMTP (PAA08439); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:02:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from dblaptop (node73.unassigned3.tfs.net [139.146.217.73]) by unix.tfs.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA23150; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:03:24 -0500
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:02:26 -0700
Message-Id: <01BD66BA.E10FEF30.dbarlow@omnids.com>
From: Dustin Barlow
Reply-To: "dbarlow@omnids.com"
To: 'Ken Locarnini' ,
CSound Mailing List
Subject: RE: Dual or more Pentium's
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:02:22 -0700
Organization: Omni Digital Systems
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Encoding: 23 TEXT
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>From what I understand, the processors run in parallel. So if you have a
dual Pentium 200, then it is the equivalent of a 400 mhz machine.
DB
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Locarnini [SMTP:nunativs@jps.net]
Sent: Sunday, April 12, 1998 2:08 PM
To: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Dual or more Pentium's
So what would multiple processors do, double the speed? the power?
Confused.
Ken
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
----
The Renew Eden Project
"You will see it, when you believe it."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
----
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22815;
13 Apr 98 15:18 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa02214;
13 Apr 98 15:18 BST
Received: (qmail 24045 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 14:18:22 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 14:18:22 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (PAA11737); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:14:07 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 15:13:48 +0100
Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (PAA21916); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:13:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost)
by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA29385
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:13:42 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:13:42 -0500 (CDT)
From: "joe.beuckman"
X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar
Cc: CSound Mailing List
Subject: RE: Dual or more Pentium's
In-Reply-To: <01BD66BA.E10FEF30.dbarlow@omnids.com>
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Dustin Barlow wrote:
> >From what I understand, the processors run in parallel. So if you have a
> dual Pentium 200, then it is the equivalent of a 400 mhz machine.
Not exactly- there is overhead associated with running the processors in
parallel- for instance, only one of the processors can write to a shared
memory segment at one time... it depends heavily on exactly what type of
operations are being performed but i would roughly guestimate that you
might call it a 370-390 mhz machine- never 400 mhz even for the most
efficiently written program.
-j0e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22836;
13 Apr 98 15:23 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa02504;
13 Apr 98 15:22 BST
Received: (qmail 24079 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 14:22:50 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 14:22:50 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (PAA00531); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:18:30 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 15:17:57 +0100
Received: from condor.CC.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.103] by hermes via ESMTP (PAA21997); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:17:51 +0100 (BST)
Received: from eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA (eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.70]) by condor.CC.UMontreal.CA with ESMTP id KAA21416
(8.6.11/IDA-1.6); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:17:51 -0400
Received: from mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA (mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA [132.204.2.73])
by eole.ERE.UMontreal.CA (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA04170;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:17:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from pichej@localhost)
by mistral.ERE.UMontreal.CA (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA25275;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:17:45 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:17:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Piche Jean
Subject: RE: Dual or more Pentium's
To: Dustin Barlow
Cc: 'Ken Locarnini' ,
CSound Mailing List
In-Reply-To: <01BD66BA.E10FEF30.dbarlow@omnids.com>
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>
> From what I understand, the processors run in parallel. So if you have a
> dual Pentium 200, then it is the equivalent of a 400 mhz machine.
hmmm, that would be nice, but reality is otherwise... The software has to
implement processing routines in a very specific way to take advantage of
parallelism. My hunch is that you *may* be able to run two distinct csound
processes at the same time, writing to separate files, but even that is not
at all clear... However, some advantage may be gained from being able to
fully dedicate a CPU to synthesis duties but not much beyond that.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Jean Piche
Musique - UdM
pichej@ERE.Umontreal.ca
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22989;
13 Apr 98 16:50 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07322;
13 Apr 98 16:50 BST
Received: (qmail 24507 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 15:50:19 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 15:50:19 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA25115); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:45:23 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 16:44:58 +0100
Received: from R-Foo@internexus.net [206.152.14.2] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA13742); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:44:51 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (master@localhost)
by micro.internexus.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA12418;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:41:36 -0500
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 11:41:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Laszlo Vecsey
To: Piche Jean
Cc: Dustin Barlow , 'Ken Locarnini' ,
CSound Mailing List
Subject: RE: Dual or more Pentium's - threaded csound
In-Reply-To:
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
How difficult would it be to create a threaded csound?
i.e. how much more spaghetti would that add to the code :>
- lv
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Piche Jean wrote:
> >
> > From what I understand, the processors run in parallel. So if you have a
> > dual Pentium 200, then it is the equivalent of a 400 mhz machine.
>
> hmmm, that would be nice, but reality is otherwise... The software has to
> implement processing routines in a very specific way to take advantage of
> parallelism. My hunch is that you *may* be able to run two distinct csound
> processes at the same time, writing to separate files, but even that is not
> at all clear... However, some advantage may be gained from being able to
> fully dedicate a CPU to synthesis duties but not much beyond that.
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________________________
> Jean Piche
> Musique - UdM
> pichej@ERE.Umontreal.ca
>
>
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23020;
13 Apr 98 17:02 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa07977;
13 Apr 98 17:02 BST
Received: (qmail 17073 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:02:42 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:02:42 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (QAA18075); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:58:02 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 16:57:39 +0100
Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (QAA20791); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:57:32 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost)
by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA17439
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:57:39 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:57:39 -0500 (CDT)
From: "joe.beuckman"
X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar
To: CSound Mailing List
Subject: cross-platform
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
it came up on the akai list that we might write our own os for their
samplers. my question is, if we find out enough to write our own os, can
we also port csound to the akai platform?
-j0e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23032;
13 Apr 98 17:05 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08183;
13 Apr 98 17:05 BST
Received: (qmail 24602 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:05:30 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:05:30 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA25168); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:00:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from dns0 by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 17:00:21 +0100
Received: from portal.dx.net [199.190.65.2] by sunny via ESMTP (QAA21963); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:56:13 +0100 (BST)
Received: from nmol.com (nmol.com [206.162.11.2])
by portal.dx.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA28719
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:01:07 -0400 (EDT)
X-Routed: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:03:00 -0500
X-Tcp-Identity: Mikeb
Received: from nmol.com [206.162.11.169] by nmol.com with smtp
id AKACAEGD ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:02:04 -0500
Message-Id: <353236E3.4F52B37D@nmol.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:01:41 -0600
From: Mike Berry
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: "Matt J. Ingalls"
Cc: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: rand() was Re: Looking towards v3.48
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
I did the random generator research for some cryptography projects and the
code that I found is extremely flat and obviously long period. It would not
have to be a new ugen, it could just replace the calls to the ANSI function rand().
We seem to be about split on the new ugen/replace question. I would suggest
the following. The new random code be substituted in the old rand ugen. That
way the most obvious random ugens use an actually random source. This will
work for all old scores where the assumption was that rand was random. Then
we add a ugen shortrnd, which uses the old, short-period random generator.
Those people who want its characteristics can simply substitute the call.
--
Mike Berry
mikeb@nmol.com
http://www.nmol.com/users/mikeb
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23064;
13 Apr 98 17:16 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08711;
13 Apr 98 17:15 BST
Received: (qmail 17566 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:15:49 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:15:49 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA01689); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:11:08 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 17:10:41 +0100
Received: from portal.dx.net [199.190.65.2] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA11550); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:10:29 +0100 (BST)
Received: from nmol.com (nmol.com [206.162.11.2])
by portal.dx.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA29797
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:12:40 -0400 (EDT)
X-Routed: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:14:34 -0500
X-Tcp-Identity: Mikeb
Received: from nmol.com [206.162.11.169] by nmol.com with smtp
id AKANDDCM ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:13:52 -0500
Message-Id: <353239A5.5A95BADA@nmol.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:13:27 -0600
From: Mike Berry
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: "joe.beuckman"
Cc: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: cross-platform
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Short answer: No
Slightly longer answer: If possible, it would take so much effort, that you
would be better off starting from scratch. This is assuming that the AKAI is
even passable (processor speed-wise) at synthesis (of which there is no
guarantee from its performance as a sampler).
--
Mike Berry
mikeb@nmol.com
http://www.nmol.com/users/mikeb
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23073;
13 Apr 98 17:18 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa08856;
13 Apr 98 17:17 BST
Received: (qmail 24683 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:18:17 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:18:17 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA03970); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:13:30 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 17:13:11 +0100
Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA03476); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:13:01 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost)
by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA20721;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 11:12:58 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 11:12:58 -0500 (CDT)
From: "joe.beuckman"
X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar
Reply-To: "joe.beuckman"
To: Mike Berry
Cc: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: cross-platform
In-Reply-To: <353239A5.5A95BADA@nmol.com>
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
really i just meant as a non-realtime-editor for sounds. you see, the
akai is violently limited as an editor as-is...
-j0e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23082;
13 Apr 98 17:25 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09151;
13 Apr 98 17:25 BST
Received: (qmail 17925 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:25:41 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:25:41 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA15030); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:20:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 17:19:48 +0100
Received: from portal.dx.net [199.190.65.2] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA27607); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:19:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from nmol.com (nmol.com [206.162.11.2])
by portal.dx.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA00730
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 12:21:42 -0400 (EDT)
X-Routed: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:23:36 -0500
X-Tcp-Identity: Mikeb
Received: from nmol.com [206.162.11.169] by nmol.com with smtp
id AKBGCHAL ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:22:40 -0500
Message-Id: <35323BB5.14FF78E9@nmol.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:22:15 -0600
From: Mike Berry
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: "joe.beuckman"
Cc: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: cross-platform
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Well, as an EDITOR csound is rather dramatically limited. But all in all,
the time is probably better spent transfering sound files between the AKAI and
computer that can run csound, rather than trying to port csound to a hardware
sampler. It has taken ADI at least three years to port csound to a
general-purpose DSP board of their own manufacture.
--
Mike Berry
mikeb@nmol.com
http://www.nmol.com/users/mikeb
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23090;
13 Apr 98 17:31 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa09386;
13 Apr 98 17:30 BST
Received: (qmail 24737 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 16:30:52 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 16:30:52 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (RAA12951); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:26:35 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 17:26:16 +0100
Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (RAA10751); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:26:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost)
by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA23410;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 11:26:03 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 11:26:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: "joe.beuckman"
X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar
To: Mike Berry
Cc: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: cross-platform
In-Reply-To: <35323BB5.14FF78E9@nmol.com>
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
> Well, as an EDITOR csound is rather dramatically limited. But all in all,
> the time is probably better spent transfering sound files between the AKAI and
> computer that can run csound, rather than trying to port csound to a hardware
agreed. maybe a better idea is to try and port those "3rd party plugins"
for sound forge and pro tools to akai format.
> sampler. It has taken ADI at least three years to port csound to a
> general-purpose DSP board of their own manufacture.
here's where the idea came from.
> --
> Mike Berry
> mikeb@nmol.com
> http://www.nmol.com/users/mikeb
Thanks Mike
-j0e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23193;
13 Apr 98 18:24 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa12388;
13 Apr 98 18:24 BST
Received: (qmail 24995 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 17:24:46 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 17:24:46 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (SAA25257); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:20:43 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 18:20:19 +0100
Received: from nicb@[194.184.60.149] by hermes via ESMTP (SAA03424); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:20:11 +0100 (BST)
Received: (from nicb@localhost)
by ax-nicb.axnet.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA07946;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:12:03 +0200
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:12:00 +0200 (MET DST)
From: Nicola Bernardini
To: Csound mailing list
Subject: Re: cross-platform
In-Reply-To:
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, joe.beuckman wrote:
>
> it came up on the akai list that we might write our own os for their
> samplers. my question is, if we find out enough to write our own os, can
> we also port csound to the akai platform?
besides all the discussion that took place after this message,
where exactely would you get enough information from?
Nicola
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nicola Bernardini
E-mail: nicb@axnet.it
Re graphics: A picture is worth 10K words -- but only those to describe
the picture. Hardly any sets of 10K words can be adequately described
with pictures.
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23199;
13 Apr 98 18:27 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa12413;
13 Apr 98 18:26 BST
Received: (qmail 20323 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 17:26:50 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 17:26:50 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (SAA09500); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:22:47 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 18:22:30 +0100
Received: from ulysses.Stanford.EDU [36.49.0.124] by hermes via SMTP (SAA15739); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:22:23 +0100 (BST)
Received: (from tkunze@localhost) by ulysses.stanford.edu (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) id KAA05418 for csound@maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:26:45 -0700
From: Tobias Kunze
Message-Id: <9804131026.ZM5416@ulysses.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 10:26:44 -0700
In-Reply-To: Piche Jean
"RE: Dual or more Pentium's" (Apr 13, 10:17am)
References:
Reply-To: tkunze@ccrma.stanford.edu
X-Url: http://ccrma-www.stanford.edu/~tkunze
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.3 08feb96 MediaMail)
To: CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: Dual or more Pentium's
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Steven Pope (as far as I remember) did some mp synthesis tests
years ago on suns and the bottom line was that the processing
speed increases just about like dotted notes, that is, each
processor adds about half the speed of the previous one:
P = Sum_{i=1}^{N-1} 1/2^i
where P is "processing power" (or 1/speed) and N is the number of
processors in the system.
Keep in mind though, that that's for ->parallelized_code<-!
csound, on the other hand is ->not<- parallelized (and far away
from being rewritten mp-safe). Hence a 2P system would run
csound not at 150% speed but at much less, as Jean Piche pointed
out. My guess is roughly 105%.
Also realize that a 400 MHz machine is not twice as fast as a 200 MHz
machine. I really don't know why people salivate over their chip speeds
when most machines still clock their busses at 33 MHz! There was
a test in the recent Byte I believe that noted only a 4% "speed" increase
from a 300 MHz Pentium II to a 333 MHz machine (as opposed to the
"expected" 9.1%).
-Tobias
--
______________________________________________________________________
Tobias Kunze t@kunze.stanford.edu
CCRMA, Stanford University http://www.stanford.edu/~tkunze
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23262;
13 Apr 98 18:50 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa13756;
13 Apr 98 18:49 BST
Received: (qmail 21068 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 17:50:18 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 17:50:18 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (SAA26624); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:46:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 18:46:11 +0100
Received: from jaguars-int.cableinet.net [193.38.113.9] by hermes via SMTP (SAA16416); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:46:04 +0100 (BST)
Received: (qmail 1513 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 17:40:55 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO cableinet.co.uk) (194.117.146.113)
by jaguars with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 17:40:55 -0000
Message-Id: <35324F2E.69012222@cableinet.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 18:45:19 +0100
From: Richard Dobson
Organization: Composers Desktop project
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Laszlo Vecsey
Cc: Piche Jean , Dustin Barlow ,
CSound Mailing List
Subject: Re: Dual or more Pentium's - threaded csound
References:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Probably very difficult, and I do wonder what the advantage would be for the
commandline versions of Csound. The overhead of managing communications between
threads, especially given the large number of global variables in Csound, avoiding
deadlock etc, might wipe out most of the presumed efficiency. For a GUI, there is
an obvious argument for implementing Csound itself as a (single) worker thread,
exchanging messages with the main user-interface thread. In any case, it would have
to be done according to the thread mechanism on each platform - Win32 threads are
quite different from unix threads (indeed Microsoft introduced 'lightweight'
threads called 'fibers' to ease the porting of unix code to Win32) - so a portable
solution might be especially tricky. If the goal is just to exploit multiple
processors, I am under the impression that on Widows NT this is supported
semi-transparently by a combination of the compiler (e.g by using the
multi-threaded standard libraries) and the OS. Windows95 cannot take advantage of
multiple processors anyway.
Richard Dobson
Laszlo Vecsey wrote:
> How difficult would it be to create a threaded csound?
> i.e. how much more spaghetti would that add to the code :>
>
> - lv
>
> On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Piche Jean wrote:
>
> > >
> > > From what I understand, the processors run in parallel. So if you have a
> > > dual Pentium 200, then it is the equivalent of a 400 mhz machine.
> >
> > hmmm, that would be nice, but reality is otherwise... The software has to
> > implement processing routines in a very specific way to take advantage of
> > parallelism. My hunch is that you *may* be able to run two distinct csound
> > processes at the same time, writing to separate files, but even that is not
> > at all clear... However, some advantage may be gained from being able to
> > fully dedicate a CPU to synthesis duties but not much beyond that.
> >
> >
> >
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23424;
13 Apr 98 19:50 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa17016;
13 Apr 98 19:49 BST
Received: (qmail 25442 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 18:50:16 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 18:50:16 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA17422); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:45:30 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 19:45:09 +0100
Received: from cougar.isg.siue.edu [146.163.5.29] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA13093); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:45:02 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost (jbeuckm@localhost)
by cougar.isg.siue.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA27582;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:44:55 -0500 (CDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: cougar.isg.siue.edu: jbeuckm owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:44:55 -0500 (CDT)
From: "joe.beuckman"
X-Sender: jbeuckm@cougar
Reply-To: "joe.beuckman"
To: Nicola Bernardini
Cc: Csound mailing list
Subject: Re: cross-platform
In-Reply-To:
Message-Id:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Nicola Bernardini wrote:
> > it came up on the akai list that we might write our own os for their
> > samplers. my question is, if we find out enough to write our own os, can
> > we also port csound to the akai platform?
>
> besides all the discussion that took place after this message,
> where exactely would you get enough information from?
>
> Nicola
i have no idea. i guess the thought might be that akai would release a
full documentation of their hardware so that anyone could develop
whatever os for the samplers. unlikely... bu that's as far as it got on
the akai list. please let's not start this discussion here but continue
it (if necessary) on the akai list:
akai@cloudfactory.org
thanx
-j0e
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23438;
13 Apr 98 19:54 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa17296;
13 Apr 98 19:54 BST
Received: (qmail 23699 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 18:54:37 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 18:54:37 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA25302); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:50:42 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 19:50:18 +0100
Received: from mercury.acs.unt.edu [129.120.220.1] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA21388); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:50:10 +0100 (BST)
Received: from jove.acs.unt.edu (0@jove.acs.unt.edu [129.120.220.41])
by mercury.acs.unt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA05541
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:50:11 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from jove.acs.unt.edu (remote35.server1.local.premium.dialup.unt.edu [129.120.52.35])
by jove.acs.unt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA16006
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:50:06 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <353274B6.7790715A@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:25:26 -0500
From: "Michael A. Thompson"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; IRIX 6.3 IP32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: oops more on SMP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
If you can get over the MicroSlop bashing(opps, I did it also... sorry)
and the SGI hype, this talks about SMP a bit: from
http://reality.sgi.com/ariel/sgi-myths.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yet another gross oversimplification and a misleading statement often
expressed by reporters who have very little or no understanding of what
multiprocessing is, and what are the bottlenecks in a computer system
with more than one CPU.
Reality:
Having N processors in a system is a long way away from
having the system utilize all their power. Achieving this is mainly an
operating system (software)
issue. It is much easier to make a system with N
processors (and there are several PC vendors stuffing their boxes with
additional CPUs) than having a system
that actually works N times faster, or close to that, by
adding more processors. If you try one of these PC based systems, and
expect doubling or tripling in
speed, chances are you're in for a disappointment. In fact
the current Intel's SHV motherboards are known to saturate their system
bus fairly easily with
commercial workloads (like databases) at a low count of 4
CPUs due to low memory bandwidth and relatively small (512KB) caches.
While Microsoft is working on scaling NT to provide good
support for 4 CPUs, SGI has working systems at customer sites supporting
128 CPUs, others
supporting over 200 CPUs, and is working on scaling its
high-end to thousands of CPUs for general application loads. Meanwhile,
Cray has been delivering
more specialized multi-processor systems since 1983 and
has shipped systems with over 2000 processors for specific application
mixes.
In symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), the bottleneck pretty
quickly becomes something other than the CPUs. Even if we assume the
operating system issue is
solved by making the OS kernel multi-threaded and adding
fine grained locks on shared data structures (which is a difficult
problem,) we are still left with
all the hardware components that do not scale when we add
CPUs: notably the bus and the memory which are shared among all CPUs.
Pretty soon adding
more processors will not speed the system at all, given
that the main bottlenecks reside elsewhere. This is why SGI is evolving
away from SMP into the new
paradigm of cc-NUMA (Cache-coherent Non Uniform Memory
Access), and using a new OS foundation (Cellular IRIX TM) in its new
Origin TM product
line.
The point here is that SGI's/Cray's lead over the PC world in
multiprocessing and scalable systems is clearly expanding rather than
shrinking.
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23445;
13 Apr 98 19:57 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa17580;
13 Apr 98 19:56 BST
Received: (qmail 25482 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 18:57:09 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 18:57:09 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (TAA16389); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:44:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 19:44:12 +0100
Received: from mercury.acs.unt.edu [129.120.220.1] by hermes via ESMTP (TAA26679); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 19:44:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from jove.acs.unt.edu (0@jove.acs.unt.edu [129.120.220.41])
by mercury.acs.unt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA04105
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:44:05 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from jove.acs.unt.edu (remote35.server1.local.premium.dialup.unt.edu [129.120.52.35])
by jove.acs.unt.edu (8.8.8/8.8.7) with ESMTP id NAA13949
for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 13:44:02 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <3532734A.B90E3926@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 15:19:23 -0500
From: "Michael A. Thompson"
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; IRIX 6.3 IP32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: SMP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Yet another gross oversimplification and a misleading statement often
expressed by reporters who have very little or no understanding of what
multiprocessing is,
and what are the bottlenecks in a computer system with more
than one CPU.
Reality:
Having N processors in a system is a long way away from
having the system utilize all their power. Achieving this is mainly an
operating system (software)
issue. It is much easier to make a system with N
processors (and there are several PC vendors stuffing their boxes with
additional CPUs) than having a system
that actually works N times faster, or close to that, by
adding more processors. If you try one of these PC based systems, and
expect doubling or tripling in
speed, chances are you're in for a disappointment. In fact
the current Intel's SHV motherboards are known to saturate their system
bus fairly easily with
commercial workloads (like databases) at a low count of 4
CPUs due to low memory bandwidth and relatively small (512KB) caches.
Ran across this info on an SGI web site:
http://reality.agi.com/ariel/sgi-myths.html
"In symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), the bottleneck pretty quickly
becomes something other than the CPUs. Even if we assume the operating
system issue is solved by making the OS kernel multi-threaded and adding
fine grained locks on shared data structures (which is a difficult
problem,) we are still left with all the hardware components that do not
scale when we add CPUs: notably the bus and the memory which are shared
among all CPUs. Pretty soon adding more processors will not speed the
system at all, given that the main bottlenecks reside elsewhere. This is
why SGI is evolving away from SMP into the new paradigm of cc-NUMA
(Cache-coherent Non Uniform Memory Access), and using a new OS
foundation (Cellular IRIX TM) in its new Origin TM product line. "
Michael
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23572;
13 Apr 98 20:23 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa18972;
13 Apr 98 20:23 BST
Received: (qmail 25610 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 19:23:40 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 19:23:40 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA14981); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:19:14 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 20:18:47 +0100
Received: from root@lix.intercom.es [194.179.21.2] by hermes via ESMTP (UAA03971); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:18:34 +0100 (BST)
Received: from jcn100110011001 (iv2-169.intercom.es [195.76.206.169]) by lix.intercom.es (8.7.3/8.6.12) with ESMTP id VAA27123 for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 21:21:44 +0100
Message-Id: <35326506.133D338F@intercom.es>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 21:18:30 +0200
From: Josep M Comajuncosas
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (WinNT; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Looking towards v3.48
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <35316AD7.8B388E8@nmol.com> <3531F84B.D971490D@ere.umontreal.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mime-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by exeter.ac.uk id UAA03971
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Mmmm, just some ideas ... but no code at all, sorry ;-)
* An arbitrary order FIR filter design opcode from prescribed specs to
implement
linear phase filters in waveguide instruments. tone means a lot of
trouble with phase distortion.
Implementing any public domain filter design routines would be ok.
* Deinterpolation filters to reinject into the delay/delayw pair at
non-integer positions (like deltapi but writing ... not reading)(thus
avoiding use of multiple waveguides instead of 1 when implementing bores
with tone holes). Docs at
http://www.acoustics.hut.fi/~vpv/publications/vesa_phd.html
By now quantizing time delay to kr integer ratios is quite imprecise
* Ability to import/export graphics to/into analysis files. A really
cool feature this one!
* Standard biquad filters should be implemented, as well as Smith's
reson-z and reson-R resonating filters.
* A conical woodwind ... I=B4ve never seen one implemented as a PhM
algorithm.
* turnon should be able to be called from inside another instrument,
thus allowing for conditional triggering and some other algorithmic
features...
* 2-D tables or even arrays for Wave Terrain synthesis and automatas...
*Maldonado=B4s opcodes for cascaded filters to save compilation time
*I saw a nice feedback electric guitar implemented with a modified pluck
alg. at Harmony central, it would be nice to implement it. I have the
source code somewhere...
Maybe I=B4ll think on more features later on...
Tnx
Josep M Comajuncosas
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23595;
13 Apr 98 20:30 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa19186;
13 Apr 98 20:29 BST
Received: (qmail 25210 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 19:29:56 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 19:29:56 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (UAA02016); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:25:38 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 20:25:06 +0100
Received: from bom2.vsnl.net.in [202.54.1.1] by hermes via ESMTP (UAA19914); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 20:24:57 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [202.54.17.64] ([202.54.17.64])
by bom2.vsnl.net.in (8.8.5/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA02203
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:55:00 +0530 (IST)
Message-Id: <199804131925.AAA02203@bom2.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: A newbie speaks his piece.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 00:55:13 -0000
X-Mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Drew Skyfyre
To: Csound !!!
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
o.k.
Sorry to bother you all with this,but it's bugging me.
Just got the message below.Tried sending Kevin Hosey unsubscribe
instructions,but got a host unknown reply for both addresses on his
message.Either he made a mistake,my local ISP's mail server screwed up
,or Mr.Hosey has a problem.My apologies to Kevin,if his message was well
meant.
I hope no one on the list is actually offended by any newbie
questions.Seems like ,for some people, nearly every message about
something they already know about is a waste of their time.Did a stork
drop you off all wise in the ways of Csound or something ?
How many seconds of your time would you spend to glance at a message long
enough to decide it isn't worth your while ?
We all have to learn sometime.I'm at my Mac 15 hours a day till 4am
struggling through 7 new (to me) computer music programs and microtonal
theory.I know very little as yet,but I'm always ready to help.Heck,I'll
dig through the documentation,if I don't know.
I am extremely grateful to all of you who took the time to answer my
little queries.I even got some
great advice off list from people who I've never seen writing into the
list.
I'm certain there are a lot of good people who subscribe to this list,but
keep silent because their too shy or intimidated.
Please think about it.We'll all be better musicians and people.
>Subject: Re: Clicking sound in PowerMac audio.Help!?
>Sent: 4/13/98 15:40
>Received: 4/14/98 00:08
>From: Kevin Hosey, khosey@pulsetechproducts.com
>To: Drew Skyfyre, steele@bom2.vsnl.net.in
>
>Someone plese tell me how I get off this mailing list. I don't know how
>I got on it in the first place.I just know I'm getting way too many of
>these & it's slowing me down!!!
>
>
>Kevn Hosey
>ppc@pulsetechproducts.com
>
>
>Drew Skyfyre wrote:
(the question about the clicking sound )
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23847;
13 Apr 98 23:19 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa28212;
13 Apr 98 23:18 BST
Received: (qmail 557 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 22:18:59 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 22:18:59 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (XAA08146); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 23:14:18 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 23:14:00 +0100
Received: from root@unix.tfs.net [199.79.146.60] by hermes via ESMTP (XAA21331); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 23:13:53 +0100 (BST)
Received: from dblaptop (node73.unassigned3.tfs.net [139.146.217.73]) by unix.tfs.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA09120; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:15:00 -0500
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:14:50 -0700
Message-Id: <01BD66FF.AADB6300.dbarlow@omnids.com>
From: Dustin Barlow
Reply-To: "dbarlow@omnids.com"
To: "'Michael A. Thompson'" ,
"Csound@noether.ex.ac.uk"
Subject: RE: SMP
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:14:49 -0700
Organization: Omni Digital Systems
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Encoding: 61 TEXT
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Here's a couple of articles I found that I'll throw into the discussion:
http://developer.intel.com/design/pcisets/PRODBREF/29772801.HTM
http://developer.intel.com/design/agpsets/440/297855_001.htm
http://developer.intel.com/design/pcisets/PRODBREF/430TX/708.HTM
http://developer.intel.com/design/pcisets/PRODBREF/WHY_CONC.HTM
Dustin
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A. Thompson [SMTP:mat0001@jove.acs.unt.edu]
Sent: Monday, April 13, 1998 1:19 PM
To: Csound@noether.ex.ac.uk
Subject: SMP
Yet another gross oversimplification and a misleading statement often
expressed by reporters who have very little or no understanding of what
multiprocessing is,
and what are the bottlenecks in a computer system with more
than one CPU.
Reality:
Having N processors in a system is a long way away from
having the system utilize all their power. Achieving this is mainly an
operating system (software)
issue. It is much easier to make a system with N
processors (and there are several PC vendors stuffing their boxes with
additional CPUs) than having a system
that actually works N times faster, or close to that, by
adding more processors. If you try one of these PC based systems, and
expect doubling or tripling in
speed, chances are you're in for a disappointment. In fact
the current Intel's SHV motherboards are known to saturate their system
bus fairly easily with
commercial workloads (like databases) at a low count of 4
CPUs due to low memory bandwidth and relatively small (512KB) caches.
Ran across this info on an SGI web site:
http://reality.agi.com/ariel/sgi-myths.html
"In symmetric multiprocessing (SMP), the bottleneck pretty quickly
becomes something other than the CPUs. Even if we assume the operating
system issue is solved by making the OS kernel multi-threaded and adding
fine grained locks on shared data structures (which is a difficult
problem,) we are still left with all the hardware components that do not
scale when we add CPUs: notably the bus and the memory which are shared
among all CPUs. Pretty soon adding more processors will not speed the
system at all, given that the main bottlenecks reside elsewhere. This is
why SGI is evolving away from SMP into the new paradigm of cc-NUMA
(Cache-coherent Non Uniform Memory Access), and using a new OS
foundation (Cellular IRIX TM) in its new Origin TM product line. "
Michael
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23860;
13 Apr 98 23:23 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa28320;
13 Apr 98 23:23 BST
Received: (qmail 26472 invoked from network); 13 Apr 1998 22:23:40 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 13 Apr 1998 22:23:40 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (XAA10391); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 23:18:53 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Mon, 13 Apr 98 23:18:16 +0100
Received: from root@unix.tfs.net [199.79.146.60] by hermes via ESMTP (XAA02443); Mon, 13 Apr 1998 23:18:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from dblaptop (node73.unassigned3.tfs.net [139.146.217.73]) by unix.tfs.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA09763; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:19:16 -0500
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:19:06 -0700
Message-Id: <01BD6700.43531060.dbarlow@omnids.com>
From: Dustin Barlow
Reply-To: "dbarlow@omnids.com"
To: "'Michael A. Thompson'" ,
"Csound@noether.ex.ac.uk"
Subject: RE: SMP
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 17:19:05 -0700
Organization: Omni Digital Systems
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Encoding: 7 TEXT
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Sorry forgot to add one in the last message...
http://developer.intel.com/design/intarch/perfbref/243286.htm
You'll need Adobe Acrobat to read the specs...
Dustin
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa23952;
14 Apr 98 1:05 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa03647;
14 Apr 98 1:04 BST
Received: (qmail 3642 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 00:04:59 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 00:04:59 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (BAA27744); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 01:00:04 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 00:59:39 +0100
Received: from root@proxy4.ba.best.com [206.184.139.15] by hermes via ESMTP (AAA20985); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 00:59:32 +0100 (BST)
Received: from charlieb.com (baker@baker.vip.best.com [206.86.232.121]) by proxy4.ba.best.com (8.8.8/8.8.BEST) with ESMTP id QAA22558 for ; Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:59:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <3532444C.FF892BB1@charlieb.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 16:58:52 +0000
From: Charles Baker
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.32 i586)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: csound mailing list
Subject: Re: Dual or more Pentium's
References: <9804131026.ZM5416@ulysses.stanford.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
About processor/performance ratios:
I was told that the performance increase in the SGI O2 line
was attributable not so much to processor improvements, but to
a radical new board design that kept the memory/processing
for a great many system components (video, sound, co-processors,
etc.) on the main board, using some sort of unified memory space,
thus reducing/eliminating a great many 'bus' accesses and even
reducing the time lost in moving data around between different
on-board components...(those in the know, is this an accurate
picture?)
I remember J. Piche posting an impressive message about a
substantial increase in the number of oscillators the (then)
new O2 could do... perhaps it was due to this new OS design
approach, rather than processor 'MIPS'?
Please, corrections, clarification, anyone?
Charlie
--
*********************************************
Charles Baker baker@charlieb.com
*********************************************
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24115;
14 Apr 98 3:03 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa13718;
14 Apr 98 3:02 BST
Received: (qmail 27527 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 02:03:10 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 02:03:10 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (CAA20261); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 02:57:25 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 02:57:05 +0100
Received: from mail1.panix.com [166.84.0.212] by hermes via ESMTP (CAA20212); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 02:56:58 +0100 (BST)
Received: from 166.84.193.170 (coble.dialup.access.net [166.84.193.170])
by mail1.panix.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/PanixM1.3) with ESMTP id VAA02324;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 21:56:43 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3531DFD3.3C0994E0@panix.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:50:20 +0000
From: Michael Coble
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: "Michael A. Thompson"
Cc: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: SMP
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <3532734A.B90E3926@jove.acs.unt.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Michael A. Thompson wrote:
>
> Yet another gross oversimplification and a misleading statement often
> expressed by reporters who have very little or no understanding of
> what
> multiprocessing is,
> and what are the bottlenecks in a computer system with more
> than one CPU.
Well, I'm sure that someone out there really wants a dual processor pentium
pro because it sounds like it goes to 11...Spinal Tap reference:) Anyway, in
the commercial world, there is plenty of reason to own a multi-processor
machine, but often that is done to efficiently run applications that take
advantage of multi-processors. At work, for example we have several Sun 4000e
servers which run applications like Sybase over Sun Solaris 2.6. Sybase is a
very sophisticated application that allows individual processors to be used
for different things. This is very handy in enterprise computing. By the
same token, a great deal of our web stuff is done in perl5, and having 8
processors means that a single webserver can fork off dozens of simultaneous
perl5 processes without grinding the machine to a halt. It should be noted
that in the Sybase instance, the same application runs on different
processors, whereas each perl5 process is dedicated to one processor in the
second. In the long run, I don't believe that the PC is the target audience
for most MP applications...But I'm sure there are plenty of NT enthusists out
there just dying to tell me how ready Windows NT is to take on Sun Solaris:)
[snip]
--
Michael Coble, Time Inc. New Media, Pathfinder
Music: http://pathfinder.com/pathfinder/staff/mcoble/music/
Gallery: http://www.panix.com/~coble, representing various artists
Hitman: http://pathfinder.com/pathfinder/staff/mcoble/
Work: http://pathfinder.com/
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24333;
14 Apr 98 5:56 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa22717;
14 Apr 98 5:55 BST
Received: (qmail 28271 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 04:56:11 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 04:56:11 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (FAA23224); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 05:52:24 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 05:52:03 +0100
Received: from dry3.jps.net [208.25.63.31] by hermes via ESMTP (FAA11052); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 05:51:56 +0100 (BST)
Received: from gv.net.gv.net (istk-port325.jps.net [208.25.62.92])
by dry3.jps.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id VAA19545;
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 21:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <001a01bd6760$edea0460$5c3e19d0@gv.net.gv.net>
Reply-To: Ken Locarnini
From: Ken Locarnini
To: Michael Coble ,
"Michael A. Thompson"
Cc: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at UK.AC.Bath.maths.stork
Subject: Re: SMP/ Down to Earth
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 21:50:55 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>
> Well, I'm sure that someone out there really wants a dual processor
pentium
>pro because it sounds like it goes to 11...Spinal Tap reference:)
Personally I just want to run 5-10 nice instruments with some sampled
percussion with effects in realtime and with midi control. Since I only
have a Pentium 200 MMX and a Soundblaster which offers nothing for helping
audio, I'm curious as to how much computor one needs since you all have
access to university stuff. Sorry to clog up the list but I think Dustin
started this......
Ken
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24390;
14 Apr 98 6:32 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24561;
14 Apr 98 6:31 BST
Received: (qmail 28443 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 05:32:18 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 05:32:18 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (GAA07607); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 06:24:36 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 06:24:11 +0100
Received: from sun1.fabaris.it [194.91.204.1] by hermes via SMTP (GAA19884); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 06:24:04 +0100 (BST)
Received: from sun1.fabaris.it.fabaris.it by fabaris.it (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id HAA24807; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:13:49 +0200
Message-Id: <3532F31E.3C21@fabaris.it>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:24:46 +0200
From: Riccardo Bianchini
Reply-To: rb@fabaris.it
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Dual or more Pentium's
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
I remember a parallelized version of Csound implemented for the Inmos
Transputer (in Occam languege, I think). Anyone knows abolut it? Could
be a starting point.
Riccardo
--
Riccardo Bianchini, Professor
Scuola di Musica Elettronica
Conservatorio "S.Cecilia", Roma (Italy)
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Acres/4768
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24487;
14 Apr 98 8:36 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa00975;
14 Apr 98 8:36 BST
Received: (qmail 28974 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 07:36:34 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 07:36:34 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (IAA02720); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 08:32:08 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 08:31:47 +0100
Received: from triton.worldonline.nl [194.151.128.28] by hermes via ESMTP (IAA21811); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 08:31:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from PC_hcp.worldonline.nl (zwl1-p2.worldonline.nl [195.241.133.2])
by triton.worldonline.nl (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA16192
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:31:43 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id:
Priority: Normal
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: Hans Pelleboer
Subject: new noise generator
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 08:23:24 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Dear group,
As I have been following the growing discussion about adding
yet another operator in Csound to generate noise, I would
like to propose the following:
[1] keep the original name; we are rapidly running out of useful names
already, as everybody who tries to run old orc/sco's with newer
versions of csound will have noticed.
[2] keep the 64k cycle as its default behaviour, so that it will
stay compatible with older scores.
[3] add an optional flag to the operator that will determine it's cycle
length in bits, so that both real short as well as cosmologically
long random cycles will be available. The implementation
might even allow integer length cycles, instead of powers of two.
a silly, but perhaps interesting addition might be --given that a
shift-register/EXOR type algorithm is used-- to make the feedback
points externally definable. All kinds of glorious pseudo-periodicities
will appear, if we make the random behaviour slightly less than perfect!
Hans Pelleboer
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24493;
14 Apr 98 8:37 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa00991;
14 Apr 98 8:36 BST
Received: (qmail 14000 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 07:37:11 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 07:37:11 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (IAA16297); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 08:33:20 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 08:33:00 +0100
Received: from triton.worldonline.nl [194.151.128.28] by hermes via ESMTP (IAA24205); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 08:32:54 +0100 (BST)
Received: from PC_hcp.worldonline.nl (zwl1-p2.worldonline.nl [195.241.133.2])
by triton.worldonline.nl (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA16730
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:32:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id:
Priority: Normal
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
To: csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: Hans Pelleboer
Subject: Repeat? What about loops?
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 09:30:11 PDT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Dear group,
Another proposal. In order to allow for loops in scores with different
lengths,
I thought along these lines: Fit the repeat statement-to-be with the
following variables, so that it can be invoked multiple times in one score
--and perhaps even recursively.
e.g.;
Repeat statement
| start time
| | section length
| | | number of repeats
| | | |
r -s4 -l20 -n6
; then the score fragment
( a tempo statement here perhaps?)
i1 0 .5 1024 440.............
i1 1 .75 1500 ..............
i1 .........................
...............
...........
r -e ; some termination flag to demarcate the end of the section
This would TREMENDOUSLY enhance the power of the score language;
e.g. generate polymorphically perverse polyrhythms, generating complex
structures out of a few `cells' , reinvent the hemiola, allow for multiple
meters in the same score, without requiring multiple compilations
-- help!, this starts to sound like we finally would be able to actually
COMPOSE something with this stuff!
Spem in alium,
Hans Pelleboer
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24547;
14 Apr 98 9:30 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa03886;
14 Apr 98 9:30 BST
Received: (qmail 15674 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 08:30:33 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 08:30:33 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (JAA19720); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:25:25 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 09:24:52 +0100
Received: from bom2.vsnl.net.in [202.54.1.1] by hermes via ESMTP (JAA03583); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:24:43 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [202.54.17.67] ([202.54.17.67])
by bom2.vsnl.net.in (8.8.5/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA04728;
Tue, 14 Apr 1998 13:54:38 +0530 (IST)
Message-Id: <199804140824.NAA04728@bom2.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: Re: SMP/ Down to Earth
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 13:54:51 -0000
X-Mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Drew Skyfyre
To: Ken Locarnini
Cc: Contribute
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>just want to run 5-10 nice instruments with some sampled
>percussion with effects in realtime and with midi control. Since I only
>have a Pentium 200 MMX and a Soundblaster which offers nothing for helping
>audio, I'm curious as to how much computor one needs
One word Ken : Kyma !
Possible solution to anyone's realtime audio/synthesis needs.
Black box with between2 and 8 ,66MHz, Motorola 56002 DSPs .Works with
Csound.GUI.But!->Costs between
$4400 and @$8365.
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24557;
14 Apr 98 9:40 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04410;
14 Apr 98 9:40 BST
Received: (qmail 29264 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 08:40:41 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 08:40:41 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (JAA10168); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:36:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 09:36:21 +0100
Received: from root@huitzilo.tezcat.com [204.128.247.17] by hermes via ESMTP (JAA23348); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:36:15 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [204.248.80.120] (antiorp.tezcat.com [204.248.80.120])
by huitzilo.tezcat.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/tezcat-96091001) with SMTP id DAA12746
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 03:36:14 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199804140836.DAA12746@huitzilo.tezcat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 03:43:08 -0600
To: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at UK.AC.Bath.maths.stork
From: =cw4t7abs
Subject: Re: SMP/ Down to Earth
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>>just want to run 5-10 nice instruments with some sampled
>>percussion with effects in realtime and with midi control. Since I only
>>have a Pentium 200 MMX and a Soundblaster which offers nothing for helping
>>audio, I'm curious as to how much computor one needs
>
>One word Ken : Kyma !
msp + max + makintosh
segmentat]on v!ol.ation -- k=F8re dump.d
|
p r 0 d U k t [=7F]-----| =D8 f =D8 =
=D8 =D8 3
|
hTTp://www.tezcat.com/~antiorp
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24563;
14 Apr 98 9:41 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa04517;
14 Apr 98 9:41 BST
Received: (qmail 29290 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 08:41:33 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 08:41:33 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (JAA20983); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:37:21 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 09:37:00 +0100
Received: from bom2.vsnl.net.in [202.54.1.1] by hermes via ESMTP (JAA06098); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:36:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [202.54.17.67] ([202.54.17.67])
by bom2.vsnl.net.in (8.8.5/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA10499
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 14:06:42 +0530 (IST)
Message-Id: <199804140836.OAA10499@bom2.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: Re: A newbie speaks his piece.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 14:06:56 -0000
X-Mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Drew Skyfyre
To: Csound!!!
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Clarification :
I know a lot of listers are very busy people and that was my point when I
wrote about how long
it takes to glance at a message long enough to just file/delete it.
I did not mean to say that every one who has an answer should reply.
I sometimes have no choice but to ask a stupid question on the
list,because there isn't
anyone in this little corner of the world (Goa,India) with a clue about
computer music.Heck,the local,and only Apple dealer in the state, knows
as much about Macs as they do about the inner workings of the Hubble.
Cheers !
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24605;
14 Apr 98 10:17 BST
Received: from mercury.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa06590;
14 Apr 98 10:16 BST
Received: (qmail 29479 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 09:17:17 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by mercury.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 09:17:17 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (KAA15307); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 10:09:56 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 10:09:39 +0100
Received: from bom2.vsnl.net.in [202.54.1.1] by hermes via ESMTP (KAA24422); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 10:09:30 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [202.54.17.94] ([202.54.17.94])
by bom2.vsnl.net.in (8.8.5/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA06083
for ; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 14:39:39 +0530 (IST)
Message-Id: <199804140909.OAA06083@bom2.vsnl.net.in>
Subject: Re: SMP/ Down to Earth
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 98 14:39:53 -0000
X-Mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Drew Skyfyre
To: Contribute
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
>>One word Ken : Kyma !
>
>
>msp + max + makintosh
Point taken.
While we're at it -> G3 + IDE drive =poop
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24781;
14 Apr 98 11:48 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa11900;
14 Apr 98 11:47 BST
Received: (qmail 22242 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 10:48:11 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 10:48:11 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (LAA22423); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 11:39:08 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 11:38:51 +0100
Received: from root@pluto.senet.com.au [203.11.90.2] by hermes via ESMTP (LAA15274); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 11:38:40 +0100 (BST)
Received: from c3-p12.senet.com.au (c3-p12.senet.com.au [203.56.237.141])
by pluto.senet.com.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id UAA25874;
Tue, 14 Apr 1998 20:08:26 +0930
Date: 14 Apr 98 20:07:52 +0930
Subject: Re: SMP/ Down to Earth
From: Nathan Day
To: Michael Coble ,
"Michael A. Thompson"
Cc: Csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Cyberdog/2.0
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
I was reading that with large level 2 caches of 1:1 ratio the main problem
with multiple processors was in caches read/write conflicts, with a large
level 2 cache the amount of time needed to wait for data over the main bus
was reduced, mind you this was from IMB and Motorola and about there
competition to Intels upcoming 64bit chip, so it could be just marketing
propaganda, they plan to basically just stick 4 64bit Power PC processors
in the same chip maybe along with a VLIW processor for DSP, and were
working on new cache page flagging algorithms, I think they were going to
transfer some of the work load to code compilation stage similar to what
Intel plans to do with there knew 64bit EPIC(explicitly parallel
instruction computer, I think this is just marketing talk for VLIW).
I see that the MPEG-4 audio description language seems to be up and running
at anybody had I go at it, no mac
version yet and I don't plan to touch a line of code until I can get
Rhapsody, though I'm think of just writing my own framework for Rhapsody, I
want to create a framework with the goals of emphasis on non-real time, a
pull instead of push signal model were units request signals instead of
having signals passed to them, the ability for units to request signals
from any point in time(ie look forward/backwards in audio, score or control
paths, I'll add some buffer units to help reduce the doubling up of
calculations), but most importantly just the ability to design instruments
with some smarts, ie instruments that have more abstract controllers/ add
there own accidentals/ fill in details.
Nathan Day
nathand@senet.com.au
Received: from stork.maths.bath.ac.uk by omphalos.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa24827;
14 Apr 98 12:19 BST
Received: from pat.bath.ac.uk by stork.maths.Bath.AC.UK id aa13687;
14 Apr 98 12:18 BST
Received: (qmail 23940 invoked from network); 14 Apr 1998 11:19:11 -0000
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk (HELO exeter.ac.uk) (144.173.6.14)
by pat.bath.ac.uk with SMTP; 14 Apr 1998 11:19:11 -0000
Received: from noether [144.173.8.10] by hermes via SMTP (MAA19926); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 12:08:15 +0100 (BST)
Received: from hermes.ex.ac.uk by maths.ex.ac.uk; Tue, 14 Apr 98 12:07:58 +0100
Received: from strato-fe0.ultra.net [146.115.8.190] by hermes via ESMTP (MAA08497); Tue, 14 Apr 1998 12:07:51 +0100 (BST)
Received: from jhvh1 (trismegist.ultranet.com [199.232.96.18]) by strato-fe0.ultra.net (8.8.8/ult.n14767) with SMTP id HAA02832; Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:07:26 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19980414071048.0099fb80@pop.ma.ultranet.com>
X-Sender: maliq@pop.ma.ultranet.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 07:10:48 -0400
To: Hans Pelleboer , csound@maths.ex.ac.uk
From: Code Spaz
Subject: Re: Repeat? What about loops? GENIUS!
In-Reply-To:
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-csound-outgoing@maths.ex.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Hey! Yeah! Why not!?
This is what I've been wishing for since my days as an undergrad pup using
csound on a Vax!
Imagine using the word 'composition' in csound without having to put the
quotes around it!
My vote's for this, too. Doesn't sound like it should be _earth
shattering_ to implement, either. But I'd understand if it got put off to
3.49....
At 09:30 AM 4/14/98 PDT, Hans Pelleboer wrote:
>Dear group,
>Another proposal. In order to allow for loops in scores with different
>lengths,
>I thought along these lines: Fit the repeat statement-to-be with the
>following variables, so that it can be invoked multiple times in one score
>--and perhaps even recursively.
>
>e.g.;
>
>Repeat statement
> | start time
> | | section length
> | | | number of repeats
> | | | |
> r -s4 -l20 -n6
>; then the score fragment
>( a tempo statement here perhaps?)
>i1 0 .5 1024 440.............
>i1 1 .75 1500 ..............
>i1 .........................
>...............
>...........
>r -e ; some termination flag to demarcate the end of the section
>
>
>This would TREMENDOUSLY enhance the power of the score language;
>e.g. generate polymorphically perverse polyrhythms, generating complex
>structures out of a few `cells' , reinvent the hemiola, allow for multiple
>meters in the same score, without requiring multiple compilations
>-- help!, this starts to sound like we finally would be able to actually
>COMPOSE something with this stuff!
>
>Spem in alium,
>
>Hans Pelleboer
>
>
>
>
|