On Jan 16 2011, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
On 01/16/2011 02:45 AM, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
I wasn't aware of this. How bad are we talking here? After all, I'm
not after scientific sound localization, but into realistic sounding,
natural ambience for live music recording. So if it sounds like i
On 01/16/2011 02:45 AM, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
> I wasn't aware of this. How bad are we talking here? After all, I'm
> not after scientific sound localization, but into realistic sounding,
> natural ambience for live music recording. So if it sounds like it
> COULD be real, it doesn't matter if
I wasn't aware of this. How bad are we talking here? After all, I'm not after
scientific sound localization, but into realistic sounding, natural ambience
for live music recording. So if it sounds like it COULD be real, it doesn't
matter if it IS real. As long as it doesn't create an image that
At 7:03 PM -0500 1/15/11, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote:
Thanks! Any plans for updating the code to handle higher sample rates
Even at 192k, the lowest 2 octaves will only be slightly degraded.
No, I can't tell you exactly how much.
or to process/output undithered 32-bit float?
No. If
Thanks! Any plans for updating the code to handle higher sample rates or to
process/output undithered 32-bit float?
PS: are your SSP-1 still being built/sold?
Ronald
On 15 Jan 2011, at 14:13, Michael Dunn wrote:
> There's my clunky old Python version. Works well, if slowly, though these
> da
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 07:53:05PM +0100, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
> a) fraudulent
> b) an insult to my intelligence.
Couldn't agree more. And while I could ignore b), a) remains
what it is regardless of my or any interpretation.
> it's called a diacritical mark, or, as you observed correctly,
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 07:47:55PM +, d...@york.ac.uk wrote:
> For a 20Hz signal I'm getting -3 degrees error at 96kHz but -37
> degrees at 192kHz. Not done any sweeps yet, just spot measurements.
> If this is different from yours, it's probably something I've done
> in porting the code over
biophonics.org
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110115/ff6ce616/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
Hi Fons,
For a 20Hz signal I'm getting -3 degrees error at 96kHz but -37 degrees
at 192kHz. Not done any sweeps yet, just spot measurements. If this is
different from yours, it's probably something I've done in porting the code
over to a VST
Dave
On Jan 15 2011, f...@kokkinizit
There's my clunky old Python version. Works well, if slowly, though
these days, it should be fast enough!
http://www.cantares.on.ca/UHJenc.htm
Michael Dunn
Cantares Electronic Design and Consulting
Kitchener, ON, Canada
(519) 744-9395
inqu
On 01/15/2011 06:24 PM, Aart Nienhuis wrote:
oh come on. decent webspace is cheap, there is no reason to annoy users
with that kind of crap. plus i was using a friend's windows machine,
which makes me kinda wary of malware.
You seem to be annoyed pretty easy if one popup makes you go into
stre
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 06:19:33PM +, d...@york.ac.uk wrote:
> problem with Fon's code is that the filter poles are pre-optimised
> for a limited range of sample rates (44.1/88.2 and 48/96) and I'd
> like more even more choice.
192 kHz ???
> It shows a little bit more phase
> difference vari
On 01/15/2011 07:19 PM, d...@york.ac.uk wrote:
What I'd
be really interested in is if anyone has any code (Scilab, Octave or
even Matlab) to optimise the choice of poles
there used to be a graphical linux tool called polarbear, written by
maarten de boer, iirc. haven't tried to build it in
oney.
rgds, Geoffrey -- next part -- An HTML
attachment was scrubbed... URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110115/5ca3ac54/attachment.html>
___ Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https:/
There is, of course, also this
http://www.oktava-online.com/shop/view_prod.php?id=194 though the capsule
separation is rather too large to make a good A format mic.
Dave
On Jan 15 2011, John Leonard wrote:
You might also want to look at this from Oktava - small package and
around the righ
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 14:14:27 +0100
From: J?rn Nettingsmeier
Subject: Re: [Sursound] Sursound Digest, Vol 30, Issue 8
To: sursound@music.vt.edu
Message-ID: <4d319db3.4030...@stackingdwarves.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 01/15/2011 12:27 PM,
You might also want to look at this from Oktava - small package and around the
right price.
http://www.oktava-online.com/shop/view_prod.php?id=189
Regards,
John
On 14 Jan 2011, at 17:19, Augustine Leudar wrote:
> Between £80 and £180 Uk pounds each more or less
__
Calrec unit (as designed by Geoffrey)-
>> Nice to know something I did 30 years ago is still worth ripping off :-)
>> These are probably ok at 96 or 192, but at 44.1/48 I think they
>> will wander off at high frequencies due to warping.
>>
Just a thought:
Five at UKL150 gives you ULK750, which is more or less the price of a CoreSound
TetraMic plus the adaptors. Then you can decode to pretty much what output
geometry you want, plus the fact that the current draw from the Tetra is going
to be rather less than from five of the Rode
On 01/15/2011 12:27 PM, Aart Nienhuis wrote:
> Are you familiar with Plogue Bidule ?
> Take a look at my website http://www.dtsac3.com
this page tried to force a popup on me which was blocked, and another
which sneaked past the blocker and told me i was the zillionth visitor
to this website an
ping off :-)
> These are probably ok at 96 or 192, but at 44.1/48 I think they
> will wander off at high frequencies due to warping.
> A better approach is to look for a solution which is symmetrical
> about fs/4. That version is only about 20 years old :-)
> Used with backwards dub
> Are you familiar with Plogue Bidule ?
> Take a look at my website http://www.dtsac3.com
this page tried to force a popup on me which was blocked, and another
which sneaked past the blocker and told me i was the zillionth visitor
to this website and could claim a prize by entering my cell phon
partitioned convolution a run for its money.
rgds,
Geoffrey
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20110115/5ca3ac54/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
On 14.01.2011, at 23:42, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
> What we really need is someone with the mechanical skills to produce
> four angled pieces of metal tubing, with threads at both ends, to screw
> in between the NT5 (or any other SD condenser) capsule and the
> grip/amplifier, so that 4 x NT5 can
24 matches
Mail list logo
