Why do you converse?

[Karlos]

bloodline wrote:

In my own code, I split the 16bit sample into two bytes. The Most significant byte played at full volume (63) in one channel. The least significant byte played at minimum volume (1) on the other channel. It seemed to work... I didn't realise about the volume thing at first... and the noise was horrible :-)

Perhaps I was supposed to shift the least significant byte by two places... but I didn't...

I'd have thought that's a prerequisite, since you'd need the LSB to be played at 1/256th the level of the MSB for a perfectly linear channel volume. As the real volume level is only 6-bits, the top 2 significant bits of your LSB will basically overlap the 2 least significant bits of your MSB producing quite noticeable noise :-?

Of course, if Paula's volume is some freaky logarithmic scale it's possible that 1/256th of "full" volume is achievable with some low volume setting.

[Karlos]

bloodline wrote:
Poo to the FM synth...

Ok, I'm being a bit facetious, I did manage to create a really dark spiky bass sound with a DX7 in a studio once... which was so good I sampled it on my W-30 so I could use it (Yamaha's MIDI support sucked).

The trick is not necessarily trying to understand how it works (really, it's phase modulation rather than frequency modulation but it amounts to the same thing) and just playing with it.

I've managed to create many interesting pads, effects and bass sounds ranging from basic sinusoidal speaker shakers to deeply resonant and dirty pulses. Unfortunately my kit is limited, getting old and noisy. I'm contemplating getting the DX150 (DX7 on a card) plugin for my MU100 to replace the  vocoder I never use :-)

[Karlos]

To be fair, all I did was to take the existing presets and then play with their parameters until I got something I liked. I spent a hell of a lot of time doing that until I began to get some subconcious understanding of what to expect. For instance, using modulator frequencies that are 1/2 or 1/4 of the carrier can lead to good bass sounds, or that a particular unison of operators is good for a sweep effect etc.

I don't profess to understand what the engineers were aiming for and I doubt that many of them had any idea what they were aiming for either. They just got a sound and thought about what it sounded most like afterwards :lol:

[Karlos]

motorollin wrote:

Karlos wrote:
Hybrid's remix of "Everything in it's right place"...

*vomits*
Turning that song in to a dance track is a sin. In fact, I don't see why anybody would want to remix it in the first place. It's also a really lazy remix, since he seems to have just layered stuff on top of the original track rather than attempting any kind of rearrangement.

--
moto

As far as hybrid remixes go, it is pretty poor (no doubt due to the fact you can't get an acapella or instrumental version of the original in order to rearrange it) which is probably why this remix has never been released. It does have a very good build and breakdown (from a mixing perspective) which makes it ideal for mixing into other sets and it's rarely played in isolation.

Some of their other remixes are, frankly, awesome. Regardless of the perceived quality of this one, I rather like the synth programming and if that isn't FM I'll eat my hat.

Still, I prefer Hybrid's own work over their remixes and "Wide Angle" remains one of my favourite albums.

[Karlos]

motorollin wrote:
@Karlos
That song has a very special place in my heart. Any remix would be a travesty in my eyes :-)

--
moto

Luckily for you then that Radiohead haven't released any acapella versions :-)

[Karlos]

HenryCase wrote:

What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

If you expect to gain some enriching experience from everything you do then a spot of quirky chitchat about nothing in particular is going to leave you wanting. I've known a few people like that over the years and all of them had social interaction problems since their inability to engage in smalltalk meant people found them unapproachable.

Personally I don't mind a bit of idle chat. It's usually relaxing and often good fun. That should be reason enough for it :-)

[Karlos]

bloodline wrote:

Anyway, don't you just hate it when a Band ruins an otherwise good song... it's just a travesty:


clickly clickly

Really shouldn't be allowed.. Eh Karlos ;-)

That's canny good. I've been responsible for far worse ;-)

[Karlos]

They probably don't know what the Tanhauser Gate is either then?

[Karlos]

bloodline wrote:

To be fair... no one does... except a select few si-fi geeks ;-) :-D

So, do you have any glittering C beams for your live light show?

[Karlos]

Wain wrote:

too bad most of those SF geeks don't know what Tannhäuser is either.

A German poet (possibly legend) from the middle ages, I believe. Didn't Wagner create an opera about him?