Login / Register  0 items | $0.00 NewWhat is KVR? Submit News Advertise

Audio mysticism

User avatar
antto
KVRAF
 
2466 posts since 4 Sep, 2006, from 127.0.0.1

Postby antto; Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:25 pm Re: Audio mysticism

and if nobody provides counter-proof - it must be true and real
just like.. god or santa claus

Vertion: i'm no longer sure what your pseudo-code is supposed to do, i'm no longer sure what language it's written in, and i have better things to do
wake me up when you have a working demo
It doesn't matter how it sounds..
..as long as it has BASS and it's LOUD!

irc.freenode.net >>> #kvr
mystran
KVRAF
 
4557 posts since 11 Feb, 2006, from Helsinki, Finland

Postby mystran; Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:17 am Re: Audio mysticism

antto wrote:and if nobody provides counter-proof - it must be true and real


Pigeon hole principle applies. Q.E.D. :wink:
Image <- plugins | forum
User avatar
Gamma-UT
KVRAF
 
3770 posts since 8 Jun, 2009, from UK

Postby Gamma-UT; Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:42 am Re: Audio mysticism

Vertion, you missed a spot:

Code: Select all
FUNCTION DESCRAMBLE_BLOCK()
  INSERT_MAGIC_FUNCTION_HERE()
END FUNCTION
stratum
KVRian
 
1262 posts since 29 May, 2012

Postby stratum; Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:53 am Re: Audio mysticism

INSERT_MAGIC_FUNCTION_HERE()


Not very uncommon :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_machine ,works exactly the same way as https://www.pbs.org/empires/thegreeks/b ... /7_p1.html
~stratum~
quikquak
KVRist
 
280 posts since 6 Aug, 2005, from England

Postby quikquak; Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:27 am Re: Audio mysticism

Vertion wrote:Decoding is actually quite fast considering what it can do... it has real applications, more to the archival, long distance transmission and syncronization.. but there are other more subtle and powerful uses. After all, the only words ever worth saying are... I love you. :)

Code: Select all

FUNCTION MAIN()
   BLOCKNUM = -1;
   BLOCK()
END FUNCTION

FUNCTION BLOCK()
   BLOCKNUM = BLOCKNUM + 1 % 256
   DESCRAMBLE_BLOCK() // INVERSE OF ENCODER SCRAMBLE
   IF BLOCKNUM = 0
      BIT = 0
      INCREMENTOR--
      IF INCREMENTOR = 0
         SAVE_BITSTREAM_AND_EXIT()
      END IF
      STREAM[INCREMENTOR] = BIT
   END IF
   BLOCKTYPE = GETBLOCKTYPE()
SECONDBIT:
   IF BLOCKTYPE = BB_INCREMENT THEN BLOCK()
   IF BLOCKTYPE = BB_UNKNOWN THEN
      IF IS_LAST_UNKNOWN_COMBO() GOTO RETURNCODE
      NEXT_UNKOWN_COMBO()
      BLOCK()
   END IF
   IF BLOCKTYPE = BB_RETURN THEN GOTO RETURNCODE
RETURNCODE:
   IF BLOCKNUM = 0 AND BIT = 0
      BIT = 1
      GOTO SECONDBIT
   END IF
   BLOCKNUM = BLOCKNUM + 255 % 256
END FUNCTION

FUNCTION GETBLOCKTYPE()
   RETTYPE = BB_INCREMENT
   FOR B = 1 TO 8
      HIGHNEIGHBOR = SEEDEDRAND(GET_HIGHPOSITION())
      LOWNEIGHBOR = SEEDEDRAND(GET_LOWPOSITION())
      IF HIGHNEIGHBOR = 1
         IF LOWNEIGHBOR = 0
            RETTYPE = BB_RETURN
         END IF
      ELSE
         IF LOWNEIGHBOR = 1
            IF RETTYPE <> BB_RETURN THEN RETTYPE = BB_UNKNOWN
         END IF
      END IF
   NEXT B
   RETURN RETTYPE
END FUNCTION


I'll check back later... please analyze fully.. I had to hash this out between chores... I used a recursive function to elaborate and example, but the final function is linear for the sake of scale.. you can easily play with the internal stats in a simplified way with that dice rolling website link I provided in an earlier post.. use 8 tetrahedron and you will see why.. chaos has difficulty branching out here, the linear encoding is too strong.. the only way it can go on beyond a few levels.. is if it were DESIGNED. You are welcome to provide counter-proof.. may the real challenges begin.. prove this impossible while keeping the working principle intact.. is this mind bending folly beyond comprehension? or is there something wonderful here to celebrate in great rejoice together?

you decide.

It's all gone a bit 'Silicon Valley' around here! But I have too many 'chores' to do, to revolutionise the world of audio... :clap: :ud:
JCJR
KVRAF
 
2113 posts since 17 Apr, 2005, from S.E. TN

Postby JCJR; Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:30 pm Re: Audio mysticism

I haven't understanding of what vertion is getting at, but reminds of algorithmic composition on the one hand and DNA on the other.

Expression of dna results in wide variety with more complexity than the parent dna chain. So far as I recall, last time I looked, dna was being considered a "construction algorithm" rather than "blueprint". A complete blueprint for an organism would require more data than merely the construction algorithm. Even if we data-compress the blueprint it requires more data than the construction algorithm.

Starting from the same DNA pattern we tend to get "nearly the same" organism. In real world biology there are numerous confounding factors, mother's hormones, nutrient levels yadda yadda. But a "digital dna" designed to build songs might be made more deterministic than biology.

Just sayin, maybe rather than lossless-data-compressing as tiny possible the audio of "Louie Louie" by the Kingsmen-- Maybe a deterministic algorithm could be devised which, when executed, naturally results in the "Louis Louis" audio? :)

Algorithmic composition is similar-- You can take a small number of rules and generate arbitrarily long songs. So the trick would be to devise the smallest set of rules which always results in "Louie Louis" and nothing else!

Maybe impossible. Maybe theoretically possible but not feasible. Haven't the foggiest idea. I wouldn't know where to start.

One could specify "Louis Louis" in general fashion with a remarkably small number of bytes in a band in a box file-- The band in a box file much smaller than the resulting midi file, and the resulting midi much smaller than the final audio.

But the trick would be a similar but smarter process which results in the EXACT AUDIO of that old cheezy song. Or any other song.
Chaotikmind
KVRer
 
29 posts since 26 Sep, 2005, from France

Postby Chaotikmind; Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:02 pm Re: Audio mysticism

JCJR wrote:I haven't understanding of what vertion is getting at, but reminds of algorithmic composition on the one hand and DNA on the other.

Expression of dna results in wide variety with more complexity than the parent dna chain. So far as I recall, last time I looked, dna was being considered a "construction algorithm" rather than "blueprint". A complete blueprint for an organism would require more data than merely the construction algorithm. Even if we data-compress the blueprint it requires more data than the construction algorithm.

Starting from the same DNA pattern we tend to get "nearly the same" organism. In real world biology there are numerous confounding factors, mother's hormones, nutrient levels yadda yadda. But a "digital dna" designed to build songs might be made more deterministic than biology.

Just sayin, maybe rather than lossless-data-compressing as tiny possible the audio of "Louie Louie" by the Kingsmen-- Maybe a deterministic algorithm could be devised which, when executed, naturally results in the "Louis Louis" audio? :)

Algorithmic composition is similar-- You can take a small number of rules and generate arbitrarily long songs. So the trick would be to devise the smallest set of rules which always results in "Louie Louis" and nothing else!

Maybe impossible. Maybe theoretically possible but not feasible. Haven't the foggiest idea. I wouldn't know where to start.

One could specify "Louis Louis" in general fashion with a remarkably small number of bytes in a band in a box file-- The band in a box file much smaller than the resulting midi file, and the resulting midi much smaller than the final audio.

But the trick would be a similar but smarter process which results in the EXACT AUDIO of that old cheezy song. Or any other song.


You're describing the Kolmogorov complexity of a data sequence here. It's theoretically sound, but it's impractical to use as you can imagine.
Finding the program that will generate your data will take eons.

Edit:
But it's maybe tractable with enough a priori info on a specific kind of data.
Previous

Moderator: Moderators (Main)

Return to DSP and Plug-in Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Architeuthis, CCBot (commoncrawl), Google Feedfetcher