Exactly. I'll admit my first thoughts on this product were skeptical, but who are we to judge? I remember when the ipod first was rumoured, and people shat all over the idea.
At least wait until the damn thing comes out before making a fully qualified opinion on it....
That's simply not true. Open View->Plot Spectrum. You will see the spectrum, and it should peak at the pitch of the fundamental note. Now move the cursor over that peak. Now you see a display of the form "Cursor: 3239 Hz (G#7) = -41 dB."
Cool. So it does have this feature.
Interesting how half the time, it actually prints out "0" or "-1" instead of a note value (probably why I didn't see this before). Maybe I'm interpreting the data incorrectly.
Like many plugins for audacity, the tool exists, but it is either non-functional or useless. The main reason I use cooledit's frequency analysis is for resampling instrumunts, a task at which audacity cannot currently do.
Say you resample someone's bassline, and you want to use this sample within another program such as reason or buzz as a machine. So you grab your sample from a file, isolate it, etc. After clipping the wav, you're good to go.
However, when you take this note into reason, you can't just go off and start programming notes into it... even though reason will happily make a melody for you, the notes that you program into the machine are only relative to the sample that you give it. That is, they do not actually reflect the sample you put in.
For instance, say the bass note you grab is an F#. However, when you feed this into another machine, it will assume it is tuned to a C. So when you tell it to play something like "C, C#, D", you would actually be hearing "F# G G#". So, everything is off-tune and sounds like ass.
In cooledit (I'm on a mac atm, so sadly, I cannot tell you specifically where to find this tool), you can whip out ce's analysis program, which will tell you the exact tuning of a given sound. So, you can figure out that the note is actually an F# rather than a C, and either work around it in buzz or reason, or you could change the pitch of the sample to adjust it to a C. In case you're curious, audacity's analysis doesn't support this. It'll run a freq analysis, but not actually tell you anything useful out of it.
I only bring this lengthy example up because it is one of the things that really pisses me off about the open source community. It's as if everyone is really excited about this program just because it's finally -somewhat- useable, and it's OSS. It's kind of like praising the retarded kid in elementary school when he spells "dog" correctly in the spelling bee. =) My point is, I'm optimistic for audacity, but it lacks a lot of -basic- functionality for composing or editing music.
I use cooledit for most of my audio editing, and your post blows me away. My first thought using the program was "wow, they finally made it run on my mac. Badass!". However, my second thought was, "hrm, it's -like- cooledit, but without any of the effects or features".
This program looks like it's off to a good start, but it's not gonna replace cooledit for me. Namely, it lacks a lot of basic plugins (ADSR, amplification envelopes, fade ins/outs that don't suck, spectrum analysis, etc). Hopefully, the VST enabler project will take care of most of this.
Actually, you're not far off from the truth. Among other things (namely DXM), Hitler's scientists developed powerful ampamines in an effort to keep soldiers up for weeks on end.
Their efforts resulted in a drug which is being re-synthesized after nearly 30 years, called yaba. Yaba will easily keep you up for 2-3 days; stronger addicts may be able to keep going for the better part of a month. Did I mention that this stuff is several times more addictive than heroin?
I'm not suggesting that this is what DARPA is working on, but I merely cite this as a historical example of the unintended consequences for this type of research.
Your post was unreasonably aggressive and full of BS. I won't flame you back, just point out a few things:
Thanks; agression is a good quality imo.
- Electric tuners do not sit next to your amp and you can use them without anyone in the audience noticing.
I've seen several amps with tuners built in.
- If you turn your guitar/amp down so the audience doesn't hear it, you probably won't hear it either. Do you know how the sound is wired at a gig?
I didn't mean 100% of the way; I usually just turn the knob down a bit and tap the pedal so you don't blast everyone's ass with dischordinance.
- Re-tuning a string or two doesn't mean that you won't go out of tune with your other bandmates.
I grant.
- Many professional players DO have tuners and use them during gigs, because only children think it's so badass to demonstrate your tuning ninja skills on stage.
I'll keep this in mind the next time I go off to see the white stripes or dave matthews or some other assorted bullshit.
Jesus, who designed this damn thing? It looks like someone glued a harmonica onto a les paul.
I like the idea of having embedded electronics in guitars, but when you get down to it, it's a really dumb idea. A guitar is a musical instrument, that can be played for years and years. A circuit board will be obsolete by next christmas.... why would you want to disgrace a 3,000$ guitar with some cheap silicon junk? Let the effects processors do the processing and tuning, and the guitar just play the damn music.
I call bullshit. I've been to dozens of gigs where guitarists retuned on stage by ear. Generally, the accepted protocol is to turn your guitar down so only you can hear it, instead of the entire audience.
Unless you are a huge moron, you generally tune your guitar before you go onstage. At the end of a song, you might hear that some chords sound a bit "off", so a quick check by the 5th degrees will tell you which string to tune. I can't even tell you how many times I've seen a lead guitarist just make a quick adjustment to the low E (or whatever tuning you use) before starting the next song in a set.
If anything, there's nothing more embarassing than going on stage, saying "hold on real quick, everybody!", and then running over to your amp and re-tuning by eye. Any musician worth his weight should be able to tune by ear within 10% at the very, very least.
I have nothing against python, but every time you ask a python nut why they choose to code in this language, the response is always something to the effect of "it's easier than perl". I don't mean to troll here, but does python have any merit of its own, or do people only use it because they don't want to use perl?
Ok, I don't mean this to be offensive in any way, but how in the hell did stevens die? None of the obituaries say, and I'm a bit curious. How do we know that he didn't disappear into the bowels of the CIA or something? -puts on tinfoil hat-
I agree in most places you just have to live with it. At the same time in places like Movies, Hospitals, Library's, Elevators I consider it your right to terminate their call.
That's no fun. It's a lot more entertaining to see if you can get them to end it for you:
Them: "yeah.... yeah... sounds good, well, I'll take care of that right away blah blah blah" You (loudly, to friend): "Oh, man, so last night, my girlfriend suck her finger up my ASS right she started to suck me off, and I fucking CAME with a VENEGENCE." Friend: "Oh yeah? No shit?!" Them: "...." You: "Yeah, and you won't BELIEVE what happened after THAT!" Them: "erm, Bob, I'm gonna have to call you back.... I'll catch you in the office tomorrow... ok yeah, goodbye"
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. I'll admit my first thoughts on this product were skeptical, but who are we to judge? I remember when the ipod first was rumoured, and people shat all over the idea.
At least wait until the damn thing comes out before making a fully qualified opinion on it....
Funny, I tried to sue you for egregious spelling errors, but my lawsuit got kicked out of court, too.
It's a rough world, isn't it?
Yeah, my musical ear sucks. ;]
But yes, we are actually a noisecore band, if you must know.
That's simply not true. Open View->Plot Spectrum. You will see the spectrum, and it should peak at the pitch of the fundamental note. Now move the cursor over that peak. Now you see a display of the form "Cursor: 3239 Hz (G#7) = -41 dB."
Cool. So it does have this feature.
Interesting how half the time, it actually prints out "0" or "-1" instead of a note value (probably why I didn't see this before). Maybe I'm interpreting the data incorrectly.
Like many plugins for audacity, the tool exists, but it is either non-functional or useless. The main reason I use cooledit's frequency analysis is for resampling instrumunts, a task at which audacity cannot currently do.
Say you resample someone's bassline, and you want to use this sample within another program such as reason or buzz as a machine. So you grab your sample from a file, isolate it, etc. After clipping the wav, you're good to go.
However, when you take this note into reason, you can't just go off and start programming notes into it... even though reason will happily make a melody for you, the notes that you program into the machine are only relative to the sample that you give it. That is, they do not actually reflect the sample you put in.
For instance, say the bass note you grab is an F#. However, when you feed this into another machine, it will assume it is tuned to a C. So when you tell it to play something like "C, C#, D", you would actually be hearing "F# G G#". So, everything is off-tune and sounds like ass.
In cooledit (I'm on a mac atm, so sadly, I cannot tell you specifically where to find this tool), you can whip out ce's analysis program, which will tell you the exact tuning of a given sound. So, you can figure out that the note is actually an F# rather than a C, and either work around it in buzz or reason, or you could change the pitch of the sample to adjust it to a C. In case you're curious, audacity's analysis doesn't support this. It'll run a freq analysis, but not actually tell you anything useful out of it.
I only bring this lengthy example up because it is one of the things that really pisses me off about the open source community. It's as if everyone is really excited about this program just because it's finally -somewhat- useable, and it's OSS. It's kind of like praising the retarded kid in elementary school when he spells "dog" correctly in the spelling bee. =) My point is, I'm optimistic for audacity, but it lacks a lot of -basic- functionality for composing or editing music.
I use cooledit for most of my audio editing, and your post blows me away. My first thought using the program was "wow, they finally made it run on my mac. Badass!". However, my second thought was, "hrm, it's -like- cooledit, but without any of the effects or features".
This program looks like it's off to a good start, but it's not gonna replace cooledit for me. Namely, it lacks a lot of basic plugins (ADSR, amplification envelopes, fade ins/outs that don't suck, spectrum analysis, etc). Hopefully, the VST enabler project will take care of most of this.
Actually, you're not far off from the truth. Among other things (namely DXM), Hitler's scientists developed powerful ampamines in an effort to keep soldiers up for weeks on end.
Their efforts resulted in a drug which is being re-synthesized after nearly 30 years, called yaba. Yaba will easily keep you up for 2-3 days; stronger addicts may be able to keep going for the better part of a month. Did I mention that this stuff is several times more addictive than heroin?
I'm not suggesting that this is what DARPA is working on, but I merely cite this as a historical example of the unintended consequences for this type of research.
Your post was unreasonably aggressive and full of BS. I won't flame you back, just point out a few things:
Thanks; agression is a good quality imo.
- Electric tuners do not sit next to your amp and you can use them without anyone in the audience noticing.
I've seen several amps with tuners built in.
- If you turn your guitar/amp down so the audience doesn't hear it, you probably won't hear it either. Do you know how the sound is wired at a gig?
I didn't mean 100% of the way; I usually just turn the knob down a bit and tap the pedal so you don't blast everyone's ass with dischordinance.
- Re-tuning a string or two doesn't mean that you won't go out of tune with your other bandmates.
I grant.
- Many professional players DO have tuners and use them during gigs, because only children think it's so badass to demonstrate your tuning ninja skills on stage.
I'll keep this in mind the next time I go off to see the white stripes or dave matthews or some other assorted bullshit.
Jesus, who designed this damn thing? It looks like someone glued a harmonica onto a les paul.
I like the idea of having embedded electronics in guitars, but when you get down to it, it's a really dumb idea. A guitar is a musical instrument, that can be played for years and years. A circuit board will be obsolete by next christmas.... why would you want to disgrace a 3,000$ guitar with some cheap silicon junk? Let the effects processors do the processing and tuning, and the guitar just play the damn music.
I call bullshit. I've been to dozens of gigs where guitarists retuned on stage by ear. Generally, the accepted protocol is to turn your guitar down so only you can hear it, instead of the entire audience.
Unless you are a huge moron, you generally tune your guitar before you go onstage. At the end of a song, you might hear that some chords sound a bit "off", so a quick check by the 5th degrees will tell you which string to tune. I can't even tell you how many times I've seen a lead guitarist just make a quick adjustment to the low E (or whatever tuning you use) before starting the next song in a set.
If anything, there's nothing more embarassing than going on stage, saying "hold on real quick, everybody!", and then running over to your amp and re-tuning by eye. Any musician worth his weight should be able to tune by ear within 10% at the very, very least.
I have nothing against python, but every time you ask a python nut why they choose to code in this language, the response is always something to the effect of "it's easier than perl". I don't mean to troll here, but does python have any merit of its own, or do people only use it because they don't want to use perl?
I saw the phrase "@ddicted to slashdot?" in your .sig, and my "delete-spam-now" reflex almost kicked in!
Is it just me or has Robert Cringley become the new Jon Katz?
how about, "In SOVIET RUSSIA, it fails you!"
this story sucked, but your link ruled. thx mang. =)
thank you for this extensive bouncing update. I eagerly await more bouncing news on this hot bouncing issue.
1. Take well known slashdot joke, screw up formatting
2. Get modded to +5, funny
3. ???
4. Profit!!
Ok, I don't mean this to be offensive in any way, but how in the hell did stevens die? None of the obituaries say, and I'm a bit curious. How do we know that he didn't disappear into the bowels of the CIA or something? -puts on tinfoil hat-
You're not supposed to look at it, you're supposed to hold it... So long as it's comfortable to hold in your hands, why do looks matter?
That's not the first time I've heard THAT this weekend!
I agree in most places you just have to live with it. At the same time in places like Movies, Hospitals, Library's, Elevators I consider it your right to terminate their call.
That's no fun. It's a lot more entertaining to see if you can get them to end it for you:
Them: "yeah.... yeah... sounds good, well, I'll take care of that right away blah blah blah"
You (loudly, to friend): "Oh, man, so last night, my girlfriend suck her finger up my ASS right she started to suck me off, and I fucking CAME with a VENEGENCE."
Friend: "Oh yeah? No shit?!"
Them: "...."
You: "Yeah, and you won't BELIEVE what happened after THAT!"
Them: "erm, Bob, I'm gonna have to call you back.... I'll catch you in the office tomorrow... ok yeah, goodbye"
showering, maybe?
ObviousGuy's warning level is currently at 45%. Would you like to warn this user anonymously?
No, I'm not a deviant, I'm just making a point.
With a nick like "mikeophile", I'm not so sure.....
So what you're saying is that men are viruses, right?
I heard that VT was considering buying a windows cluster, but they couldn't afford an XP license for a 2,200 processor machine. =)