Audio programming - programmer needed

[xoxos]

i think generally audio dsp is a field that individualists are more likely to excel in, given the number of proficiencies one must bear in order to bring a viable product to the marketplace.

it's possible our movie industry friend may even have a history in the gulp-military, or otherwise have been required to present the merits of a product in terms understandable to people who aren't interested in learning or knowing anything and may not be used to interacting with articulate or thinking people.

if it isn't already apparent, audio dsp is a finite field, and most of the people who have what you probably like to think of as credentials aren't going to be making vsts (eg. stanford's ccrma program.. any developers paying back that kind of money making plugins? doubtful).

[valhallasound]

if it isn't already apparent, audio dsp is a finite field, and most of the people who have what you probably like to think of as credentials aren't going to be making vsts (eg. stanford's ccrma program.. any developers paying back that kind of money making plugins? doubtful).

Well, Universal Audio was founded by CCRMA folks, and has 3 CCRMA PhDs working there, and they are able to pay their mortgages/rent. Mind you, these are PhDs, who are largely funded in their research after their first year. The MST program at CCRMA doesn't have any financial support in terms of grants, and I think it recently went from 1 year to 2 years. Which is pretty darned expensive.

And plenty of people with no college education are doing just fine in this field as well.

Sean Costello

[Shabdahbriah]

Found THIS one interesting

Pioneer Corporation: Dummy sound generating apparatus and dummy sound generating method and computer product

I speculate that this is the underlying technology for Microsofts' Songsmith.

[tony tony chopper]

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Rgh4AAAAEBAJ&prin tsec=frontcover&dq=ininventor:%22Michael+L.+Dorrou gh%22&hl=en&ei=qi2BTrmGIqvQiALO67iiDQ&sa=X&oi=book _result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ

from that page: "Simulated sound generator for electric vehicles"

Pretty funny that the future is about quiet cars, and apparently that's a problem? Ok I know that pedestrians would better still hear cars coming, but why should it have to be a shitty engine noise, why not.. birds or music I don't know? (although I admit I'd prefer to hear engine noise than lady gaga all day long)
(& I also know that the noise is also for the driver's gratification, but that's even more stupid)

[valhallasound]

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Rgh4AAAAEBAJ&prin tsec=frontcover&dq=ininventor:%22Michael+L.+Dorrou gh%22&hl=en&ei=qi2BTrmGIqvQiALO67iiDQ&sa=X&oi=book _result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ

from that page: "Simulated sound generator for electric vehicles"

Pretty funny that the future is about quiet cars, and apparently that's a problem? Ok I know that pedestrians would better still hear cars coming, but why should it have to be a shitty engine noise, why not.. birds or music I don't know?

Jetson's flying car sounds for the win.

Sean Costello

[Shabdahbriah]

Jetson's flying car sounds for the win.

clever.

I want "mine" (future electric vehicle) to have the sound of *playing cards* I used to cloths-pin to the fork and frame (in the rear) of my bike(s). The faster I peddled, the louder they were, and it was MUCH faster too.

The "engineered" retro-sound thing is quite interesting to me, really.

My current DSLR (camera) has an engineered motor drive "sound", and though pleasant, I'd like to swap it out for something more familiar. I wish I'd had the foresight to record my old Nikon F2 w/F-250 motor drive, and the F3 w/MD-4 motor drive. But then ~ how to load them???

Doubtless, those "sounds" will be available in the future, from iOWN-U or others, which own (or have licensed) the custom downloadable "ring-tones" management and distribution market*!

COOL


* and pre-empt ME from making and loading my own ring tones for my $500.00+ (retail) SMART PHONE!!!

[aciddose]

http://www.google.com/patents?id=Rgh4AAAAEBAJ&prin tsec=frontcover&dq=ininventor:%22Michael+L.+Dorrou gh%22&hl=en&ei=qi2BTrmGIqvQiALO67iiDQ&sa=X&oi=book _result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ

from that page: "Simulated sound generator for electric vehicles"

Pretty funny that the future is about quiet cars, and apparently that's a problem? Ok I know that pedestrians would better still hear cars coming, but why should it have to be a shitty engine noise, why not.. birds or music I don't know?

Jetson's flying car sounds for the win.

Sean Costello

plus, flying cars are supposed to sound like a prius.

[DaveHoskins]

The patent is held by the company I work for - Dorrough Electronics (a twice Emmy award winning company). So if you are interested in working with us send me your credentials and please only serious applicants with solid credentials need to contact us.

If it's patented you should be able to discuss it, yes? You're protected against anyone stealing your methods. Might as well tell what its number is.

Yes. The whole point of a patent is to show a world of engineers how something new and innovative is done, and said engineers can build upon the patent and the world becomes a better and technologically shared place. (yes, really).

I've never heard of a patent that's a secret before, that's why 'wcharlw' is getting all the funnies on this forum.

Dave.

[No_Use]

Yes. The whole point of a patent is to show a world of engineers how something new and innovative is done, and said engineers can build upon the patent and the world becomes a better and technologically shared place. (yes, really).

Uhm, are you serious ?

Isn't the whole point of a patent rather the exact opposite, ie forbidding others to apply a certain technique or method ?

If it's really about sharing, wouldn't something like Creative Commons be much better suited ?

edit:
I know that Creative Commons doesn't really fit here as it's more for digital media content.

[DaveHoskins]

That's the original idea, Patent's were meant for ongoing innovation amongst engineers and designers etc. Yes, it protects the inventor, but the Patent is meant to be in public view. You can use and build upon other peoples' patents and create new patents with additional innovation - but they don't readily tell people that. Well, that's what a patent writer guy told me anyway.
It's all gone litigious now though, of course.

[aciddose]

of course the purpose of patents and copyright is to promote the arts - which doesn't refer to "art" as in paintings and music and other such useless things. it's the original meaning of the term which refers to anything created through use of a skill.

in order to promote the arts, patents and copyright encourage the sharing of knowledge regarding various skills and various works, allowing others to develop these skills and produce these works.

in the past and even now skills and technology are kept secret to the detriment of various efforts. for example in software copyright is just plainly all f**ked up. in order for something to deserve protection it should be created by an artist - in other words created by the programmers. of course the programmers don't create programs - they create source code!

so the binaries themselves which are not created by artists but instead created by machines which process original source code are derivative works, but they don't on their own deserve protection.

only when the source code is protected can the binaries via their derivative status be also protected. since the source code is never released to the public, the arts are not promoted! no one can reproduce a new derivative in the same manner without the original source.

so, anyone should be able to recognize that our system currently is not working at all. period. it needs to be fixed. until then we won't be seeing nearly as much progress in the art as would otherwise be possible. (although, since copyright now lasts for 100+ years we're kind of f**ked even if source is available. is ~15 years really not enough for the typical artist?)

a solution is quite simple really. for example a centralized database of source-code. without providing source to the database, rights are not fully granted and can't be enforced. this is how the patent system is supposed to work. you give the full design (for example, schematics) to the patent office and they file it away. anyone can request access to those documents. if the documents are found to be "novel", a patent is granted.

so each binary should need to come with an identification number which links to the entry in the "inter/national source-code archive" if the author wants to block any rights to the binary.

of course you wouldn't need to file anything with the database unless it came to the point you wanted to prevent copying or whatever else. since you'd be the only person with the source code you could then file it at any time before entering into a lawsuit.

(same system currently works fine with copyright as it already exists in the united states!)

[tony tony chopper]

You can use and build upon other peoples' patents and create new patents with additional innovation

so it's like a pyramid scam?

[JonHodgson]

Yes. The whole point of a patent is to show a world of engineers how something new and innovative is done, and said engineers can build upon the patent and the world becomes a better and technologically shared place. (yes, really).

Uhm, are you serious ?

Isn't the whole point of a patent rather the exact opposite, ie forbidding others to apply a certain technique or method ?

If it's really about sharing, wouldn't something like Creative Commons be much better suited ?

edit:
I know that Creative Commons doesn't really fit here as it's more for digital media content.

The point of the patent system is to allow inventors to exchange sharing their invention with the world for a period of guaranteed income from their invention.

It's an agreement between them and everyone else, they publish how things work, and in exchange everyone else doesn't use it without their license for a period of X years.

Without it you have two problems..

1) Less invention, the possibility of a patentable and profitable invention is what drives a lot of research and development.
2) What is invented is more likely to be kept secret, if they can keep anyone else from knowing how it's done, then they can have something that is profitable forever, without patent protection that's really their only option if they want to protect their profits to some degree.

The main problem with patents is when they get granted for things that aren't really innovation, such grants would probably fail if properly challenged in court, but in such lawsuits it's often the guy whos money to pay lawyers runs out first that loses.

[Meffy]

You can use and build upon other peoples' patents and create new patents with additional innovation

so it's like a pyramid scam? :)

[Morbo] That is NOT how Ponzi schemes work. [/Morbo]

[UltraJv]

Ok, thread derailed, now bring on the cute kitty pics....