Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 8:13 am
by spiderman
oh ! in the same time wavelength !! 8^)))
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2004 9:05 am
by astroman
On 2004-01-20 02:18, wavelength wrote:
Axel Hartmann did not invent resynthesis, the Synclavier has been around for many a year (see link).
That wasn't my point
The Neuron's basic operation is a kind of 'audio wireframe' based on a new encoding strategy using wavelet compression which is then 'rendered' in the resynth engines.
The Camel system follows
exactly this scheme.
I've mentioned several times that the Python Pro can be used for a pretty similiar synthesis à la Neuron, but it has it's very own concept for both generators and resonators.
There's another 'me too' turning up after release of the Neuron, even someone famous from Germany's old synth scene.
I could be paranoid, but strangely all those people who '...worked for years...' on something just release their stuff a couple of years after someone else published the basics.
Obviously even Creamware couldn't stand temptation - or why is the time stretching on STS 5000 native code (appearing after Roland's Variphrase...)
cheers, Tom
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2004 12:38 pm
by wavelength
On 2004-01-20 09:05, astroman wrote:
On 2004-01-20 02:18, wavelength wrote:
Axel Hartmann did not invent resynthesis, the Synclavier has been around for many a year (see link).
That wasn't my point
The Neuron's basic operation is a kind of 'audio wireframe' based on a new encoding strategy using wavelet compression which is then 'rendered' in the resynth engines.
The Camel system follows
exactly this scheme.
I've mentioned several times that the Python Pro can be used for a pretty similiar synthesis à la Neuron, but it has it's very own concept for both generators and resonators.
There's another 'me too' turning up after release of the Neuron, even someone famous from Germany's old synth scene.
I could be paranoid, but strangely all those people who '...worked for years...' on something just release their stuff a couple of years after someone else published the basics.
Obviously even Creamware couldn't stand temptation - or why is the time stretching on STS 5000 native code (appearing after Roland's Variphrase...)
cheers, Tom
it would seem that nothing is sacred any more (but at least a patent will still allow for legal rights... not sure how this works with software...)
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2004 7:49 am
by astroman
well, I think it's just the way it goes and you certainly know that using DSP code is a pretty good protection from peeking at your ideas
I remember many years ago (when software releases had something exceptional) the first thing we did was to disassemble every new release.
Of course you're not allowed, but who's to control you ?
One got a pretty good idea of the program's structure and quality even without running it a single time.
And we were nothing but curious dudes at a simple shop - noone of us ever intended to enter the software industry.
So guess yourself what real pros would do...
cheers, Tom