Thank you very much for any info

Carlo Laurenzi

These are ancient objects that were never finished and aren’t under development.

Maybe pfft~ does what you need?

mz

Carlo Laurenzi

—– Original Message —–
From: “mzed”
To:
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 11:45 PM
Subject: [maxmsp] Re: SDIF-stft~ and SDIF-istft~ ???

>
> These are ancient objects that were never finished and aren’t under
> development.
>
> Maybe pfft~ does what you need?
>
> mz
>
> –
> || michael f. zbyszynski — molecular gastronimist
> || http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/
> || http://www.mikezed.com/

Spear is using fft, and the resulting SDIF file is just a representation
of that data. It contains information which is reaching across fft frames…

> But it turned out that Sdif-based applications (spear included) aren’t
> developed enough to handle very complex and heavy material (think of a
> recording of an entire piece of orchestral music, for example). And
> also, the dimension of a sdif file which can guarantee a decent result
> in resynthesis is so many many times high that a computer has big
> problems in handling such amounts of data.

mp3 is also based on fft’s, and a decent computer oldtimer can
resynthesize even complex orchestra pieces…

But we still don’t know what you’re after. What do you want to do with
the data? I can just tell you, that for simple oscillator based
resynthesis of complex sounds. You can get pretty far with much less
than 1024 oscillators…

Stefan

–
Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com

Well, the idea is to have a piece of music (a complete one, edited mixed and
mastered) changing every specific amount of time through automatic
manipulations of its spectrum.
Resinthesizing is not an issue when you’re dealing with a simple
analysis-resinthesis operation. But it becoms an issue if you do some heavy
manipulations before resynthesis.
Artifacts and poor sound quality are some of the problems one can get into
at that point.
Sdif format, especially when the time between frames is very little, can
give some results, but there is always a problem of too many data being
handled by the computer.
Additive Synthesis is very powerful, but requires a lot of resources.
Too much power is needed to use sdif for those kinds of complex
manipulations on complex spectra.
Maybe discrete wavelet transform might be a solution, but I need to know
more about that.
Bye,

Carlo Laurenzi

But if the resynthesizing is fine, the technology is fine. You have to
enhance your manipulation if you get artefacts with the manipulation…
That requires more knowledge about psychoacoustics than about DSP
technology btw…

> Maybe discrete wavelet transform might be a solution, but I need to know
> more about that.

At least it delivers a desription of the sound which is closer to the
psychoacoustic listening model. But you can easily thin out the Spear
data according to wavelets and see how far you get with that…
Its basically less resolution for higher frequency ranges…

I had good results by splitting a plain fft into tonal and noise parts,
and just don’t touch the noise part, only manipulate the tonal part…
That research isn’t finished yet, I can’t deliver the results in this
stage, but stay tuned…

Stefan

–
Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com

Carlo

—– Original Message —–
From: “Stefan Tiedje”
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2007 7:26 PM
Subject: Re: [maxmsp] Re: SDIF-stft~ and SDIF-istft~ ???

> Carlo Laurenzi schrieb:
>> Resinthesizing is not an issue when you’re dealing with a simple
>> analysis-resinthesis operation. But it becoms an issue if you do some
>> heavy manipulations before resynthesis.
>> Artifacts and poor sound quality are some of the problems one can get
>> into at that point.
>
> But if the resynthesizing is fine, the technology is fine. You have to
> enhance your manipulation if you get artefacts with the manipulation…
> That requires more knowledge about psychoacoustics than about DSP
> technology btw…
>
>> Maybe discrete wavelet transform might be a solution, but I need to know
>> more about that.
>
> At least it delivers a desription of the sound which is closer to the
> psychoacoustic listening model. But you can easily thin out the Spear data
> according to wavelets and see how far you get with that…
> Its basically less resolution for higher frequency ranges…
>
> I had good results by splitting a plain fft into tonal and noise parts,
> and just don’t touch the noise part, only manipulate the tonal part…
> That research isn’t finished yet, I can’t deliver the results in this
> stage, but stay tuned…
>
> Stefan
>
> —
> Stefan Tiedje————x——-
> –_____———–|————–
> –(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
> — _|_)—-|—–()————–
> ———-()——–www.ccmix.com