One Synth Challenge #150: TAL-NoiseMaker (Aiynzahev wins!)

[z.prime]

Small correction: not an audio recording per-se, but something that contains or has created sample points over time. Again, definition of sampling.

I'm naturally on the same page with you on this - otherwise one could also synthesize arbitrary audio with any custom tool and just import data straight from that; however, note that my intention in that passage was just to address the specific spoken word patch Peter used, and when saying "audio recording" I meant that particular speech snippet the patch utters, which I assume was originally an actual audio-ass fully-audioded audio-audio recording.

Right, well the problem is he created a program to do this. Basically synthesizing something and importing the samples. I just wanted to clarify this point.

[Guenon]

Right, well the problem is he created a program to do this. Basically synthesizing something and importing the samples. I just wanted to clarify this point.

Indeed so, although it shouldn't be an actual problem [as in, it is evident it doesn't follow the rules, instead of being problematic to judge], for the reasons you have pointed out as well; in any case, according to Peter, that program itself was used with data that was originally in Wavosaur as actual audio, and these discrete values originate from there. In a case like this, no matter how many intermediary steps one takes, the patch still relies on the audio clip that originated the data. Without the original recording, no data, nothing to import, no spoken word (done in this manner) in Noisemaker

[Edit: and it still would be a no-no if the data for this imported spoken word was 100% synthesized, outside of Noisemaker, and not in any stage literally recorded and/or loaded into Wavosaur as audio, of course.]

[ELEX]

About the NoiseMaker plugin : there is a filter called Cl LP24. Do you know what type of filter it is? What Cl stand for?

'classic' moog-style 4-pole ?

On second thought: maybe 'classic' Roland Juno 4-pole is more likely.

Do you have a source or a hint for that ? Maybe a statement from the developers? I couldnt find the filter in the manual.

No, just speculating. TAL does a Juno emulation, hence the thought.

[briefcasemanx]

Saying it's arguable whether or not it's sampling because it's different then the PCM standard is really missing the point. Or its different from sampling because it's distorted, again missing the point.

As a thought experiment I wonder if you'd get less audible distortion if the note played in Noisemaker was extremely low, like if the synth allowed you to play notes in LFO range. In the Wikipedia article it talks about the carrier signal being higher frequency than the main signal. If there's no demodulator and the sample is short, like a word, I'm thinking a really low carrier could reduce audible distortion from there being no demodulator.

[photonic]

Voted!
After all those years I join the OSC, I am still surprised how different and versatile an apparently "limited" synth can sound.

[SeBaer]

[...]
2) You are a condescending jerk
[...]
EDIT: and also: learn to spell.

I don't know you personally, and I wouldn't dare to judge you from a couple of forum posts. But I hope you see the irony in this.
Please consider that not everybody is a native speaker of the English language (neither am I).
I get, that you fiercely try to get yout point across, but personal insults seldom convince your opponent.
Sneaking samples into a submission, however disguised, is against the rules. But the submission has been revised prior to the voting phase and the element in question removed. So can we all please return to a civil discussion?

[ELEX]

So can we all please return to a civil discussion?

By all means

...Sneaking samples into a submission, however disguised, is against the rules. But the submission has been revised prior to the voting phase and the element in question removed.

There's not just the issue of the obvious ( removed ) audio sample. There's also the 'pure math' patch(es ?)

Peter's posted code seems to me to be a specialized oscillator that runs for 12000 samples. Essentially another synth. Capturing it's output and importing it in Noisemaker still constitutes sampling imo. But it is indeed very clever and makes for a great Noisemaker demo track. Just not one that complies with OSC rules.

Code: Select all

public class FormulaToSplinePoints {
	
	private static final String SPLINE_POINT_TEMPLATE = "<splinePoint isStartPoint=\"0\" isEndPoint=\"0\" centerPointX=\"%1$f\"\r\n"
			+ "                     centerPointY=\"%2$f\" controlPointLeftX=\"%1$f\"\r\n"
			+ "                     controlPointLeftY=\"%2$f\" controlPointRightX=\"%1$f\"\r\n"
			+ "                     controlPointRightY=\"%2$f\"/>";
	private static double MIN = 0;
	private static double MAX = 1.0;

	public static void main(String[] args) {
		Locale.setDefault(Locale.US);
		//first
		System.out.println("<splinePoint isStartPoint=\"1\" isEndPoint=\"0\" centerPointX=\"0.0\" centerPointY=\"0.5\"\r\n"
				+ "                     controlPointLeftX=\"0.0\" controlPointLeftY=\"0.5\" controlPointRightX=\"0.1000000014901161\"\r\n"
				+ "                     controlPointRightY=\"0.5\"/>");
		emitStuff();
		
		//last
		System.out.println("<splinePoint isStartPoint=\"0\" isEndPoint=\"1\" centerPointX=\"1.0\" centerPointY=\"0.5\"\r\n"
				+ "                     controlPointLeftX=\"0.8999999761581421\" controlPointLeftY=\"0.5\"\r\n"
				+ "                     controlPointRightX=\"1.0\" controlPointRightY=\"0.5\"/>");
	}
	
	private static void emitStuff() {
		double steps=12000;
		double delta = (MAX-MIN) / steps;
		Random rand = new Random();
		
		double fctMin = -2;
		double fctMax = 1;
		double fctDelta = (fctMax - fctMin) / steps;
		
		double fctMinValue = Math.exp(fctMin); //use if fct is not 0 at the min point. move it up,so that minpoint will be 0.
		double fctMaxVal = Math.exp(fctMax); 
		double fctDeltaValue = fctMaxVal - fctMinValue; // use it to project into values 0-1 
		
		double maxFreq = 174.61;
		double deltaPhaseMaxFreq = 2*Math.PI*maxFreq/steps;
		double minFreq = 21.827;
		double deltaPhaseMinFreq = 2*Math.PI*minFreq/steps;
		double deltaFreq = (maxFreq-minFreq)/steps;
		double deltaDeltaPhase=(deltaPhaseMaxFreq - deltaPhaseMinFreq)/steps;
		
		//System.exit(-2);
		double phase=0;
		double deltaPhase = deltaPhaseMaxFreq;
		System.out.println("<!-- inverted exp start -->");
		for(int i=1; i< steps;i++) {
			//System.out.println(min+i*delta);
			double currentX = MIN+i*delta;
			double blendFactor = (Math.exp(fctMax-i*fctDelta) - fctMinValue) / fctDeltaValue;
			double currentY1=rand.nextDouble();
			double currentY2= 0.5+Math.sin(phase)*0.5;
			double currentY=currentY1*blendFactor + currentY2*(1-blendFactor);
			final String entry = String.format(SPLINE_POINT_TEMPLATE, currentX, currentY );
			System.out.println(entry);
			phase += deltaPhase;
			deltaPhase-=deltaDeltaPhase;
		}
		System.out.println("<!-- inverted exp end -->");
	}
}

That's what z.prime and Guenon have been discussing also.

[z.prime]

[...]
2) You are a condescending jerk
[...]
EDIT: and also: learn to spell.

I don't know you personally, and I wouldn't dare to judge you from a couple of forum posts. But I hope you see the irony in this.
Please consider that not everybody is a native speaker of the English language (neither am I).
I get, that you fiercely try to get yout point across, but personal insults seldom convince your opponent.
Sneaking samples into a submission, however disguised, is against the rules. But the submission has been revised prior to the voting phase and the element in question removed. So can we all please return to a civil discussion?

I hope you see that I actually said this exact same thing in defense of Peter earlier:

To a native English speaker, this does come across a bit confrontational but I believe we should try to think of it as a well-intentioned point and assume it is from someone who's first language is not English (I believe you're German, Peter?).

And there isn't irony here. I freely admit to being a jerk. But I am not condescending in any way as far as I know. The condescension has been all month long:

Don't know whether this makes sence for you.

... as if people cannot understand what he's done, because he is above everyone.

... it's all about using technology in a creative manner.

... as if people cannot use technology in a creative manner other than what he has done.

Seems you really don't know what AM is. Just go ahead ...

... no one can understand AM, because they are not Peter.

I'd be whatever you say, ELEX. Lack of understanding, stupid, or silly, or brain dead...

... I can't even believe someone posted something like this.

kind of interesting how the OSC community values "technical skills and understanding" vs "composition"

... what started it all: insulting the OSC community as a whole!

I'm sorry to beat this horse, but this stuff can't be overlooked or glossed over. Am I in the wrong? Could be! But I definitely did not use condescending words to anyone at any point and I believe Peter is absolutely out of line, no matter what native language he speaks.

[SeBaer]

All your arguments are valid. I didn't remember it being you specifically calling him out on his tone earlier (which in indeed appears arrogant at times).
It was using his spelling as ad hominem argument, what, to me, also came across as condenscending, after calling him exactly that. That was what ticked me off enough, to write a reply of which I didn't know how it would be perceived.
So I appreciate your levelheaded reply, because I wouldn't want to descent into a shouting match.
Cheers!

[...]
I hope you see that I actually said this exact same thing in defense of Peter earlier:

To a native English speaker, this does come across a bit confrontational but I believe we should try to think of it as a well-intentioned point and assume it is from someone who's first language is not English (I believe you're German, Peter?).

And there isn't irony here. I freely admit to being a jerk. But I am not condescending in any way as far as I know. The condescension has been all month long:
[...]
I'm sorry to beat this horse, but this stuff can't be overlooked or glossed over. Am I in the wrong? Could be! But I definitely did not use condescending words to anyone at any point and I believe Peter is absolutely out of line, no matter what native language he speaks.

[ELEX]

Oops, mistake, removed.

[briefcasemanx]

I'm sorry to beat this horse, but this stuff can't be overlooked or glossed over. Am I in the wrong? Could be! But I definitely did not use condescending words to anyone at any point and I believe Peter is absolutely out of line, no matter what native language he speaks.

Most of those statements seem innocuous other than the AM one, and I guess the one directed at ELEX, but the ELEX thing you quoted ignores the context that it is in response to ELEX getting snide at Peter without Peter having said anything to ELEX. The AM comment also happened after the conversation went downhill and he may have felt like he was getting attacked from all sides.

It makes it kinda seem like there is previous bad blood with Peter to make people automatically read negativity into some of those seemingly (to me at least) innocuous statements?

[markheath]

Didn't have time to enter the contest this month, but I did enjoy listening to all your submissions so I've voted. Well done everyone, lots of really impressive entries and great creativity.

[GeneralQ]

kind of interesting how the OSC community values "technical skills and understanding" vs "composition"

... what started it all: insulting the OSC community as a whole!

I'm sorry to beat this horse, but this stuff can't be overlooked or glossed over. Am I in the wrong? Could be! But I definitely did not use condescending words to anyone at any point and I believe Peter is absolutely out of line, no matter what native language he speaks.

As a native German speaker i honestly have no idea why you interpret this as an insult to the whole osc community. This is way to much reading between the lines from my point of view. If I want to insult the whole osc community, why would I not just simply type in my Insult directly rather than cryptically hiding it in a legitimate question if this is allowed by the rules ?
He is just wondering if people would rather give a good rating on a sounddesign focused track vs a composition focused track.
Let's illustrate this with two examples.
This track: https://open.spotify.com/track/5eBJDTLN ... 91d37540e3 is focused around the composition. It has no sounddesign whatsoever. It's just a recoded Piano performance. Which evokes a lot of interest only by it's composition.
This would be an example for a sounddesign focused track: https://open.spotify.com/track/4U0wNvX0 ... 5e27024311
The composition is extremely minimal that whole song is basically designed around that one bass sound. Even the break is just some spoken word rather than something musical.

This ultimately comes down to a communication problem.
Check out this communication model by Schulz von Thun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-sides_model
No one should ever communicate on any other level than the Factual level when communicating via text over the internet. And no one should interpret what others write on any other level. This way communication would be way more efficient and no one would be offended (unless I intentionally offend someone (which should also not be necessary in this forum)).
This is the same reason why you need to attach an emojys in every WhatsApp Message when you write with girls.

[emikaela]

No one should ever communicate on any other level than the Factual level when communicating via text over the internet.

see, this very statement is not on the factual level. not sure if that's the joke? bit weird context for it if so.

This way communication would be way more efficient and no one would be offended (unless I intentionally offend someone (which should also not be necessary in this forum)).

huh, i don't see why anyone...

This is the same reason why you need to attach an emojys in every WhatsApp Message when you write with girls.

oh no

[ELEX]

... but the ELEX thing you quoted ignores the context that it is in response to ELEX getting snide at Peter without Peter having said anything to ELEX...

How can you possibly interpret anything as snide, as you seem to think all should be taken literally ? Anyway, the only thing possibly snide about that particular post was:

Don't forget to explain it all in your track details, so we can then be properly awed.

Which came from Peter's vague track descriptions. Like summarizing effects use as "...a weird amount of Bitwig FX" Seriously, how much interest in displaying technical skills speaks from that ? We are actually required to provide track details, you know. 'Proper track details' it says in the OP.

Btw, fishing for points on the basis of finding a hack before posting a proper example or a track is poor taste imo. Subsequently tying it to the "composition vs. technical skills" issue even more so. As if those are mutually exclusive. Or it's an issue at all. Well, to Peter it seems to be. It IS actually insulting to the community. As if people cannot make their own choices and need these things pointed out to them.

But maybe I should start publishing chord sheets and pointing out the special ones, or intricate melodic stuff, then saying "mmm...let's see what the community thinks of "composition vs. technical skills." But I won't, since that would that be snide, wouldn't it ? I'll just compose what I see fit, with sounds I think fitting, and leave it at that.