Approximate? I thought that my outlined method came down to actual convolution but it's entirely possible that I grossly misunderstand what's involved; this happens to me a lot but often it's possible to mask this by claiming my misunderstanding was actually a completely new idea :¬).
i re-read and see that you actually plan to throw off a voice *every sample* (more wonderful chuck-inspired insanity!) so i withdraw the "approximate." how fast is your machine? ;--}
Actually I've been thinking about ChucKian convolution on and off since I started ChucKing since as I see convolution it deals with spectral characteristics following from timed information so in a way it fits. It's just that convolution is notoriously CPU heavy and ChucK is not so famous brute efficiency (at least not with the CPU's time, it is with mine) so I never got round to actually coding it up.
i believe there is a bunch of spectral stuff in the works, which i am hankering to get a hold of meself.
More generally I think LiSa might be good for many, many unexpected things because it's quite general and open to interpertation so that's good.
i'm glad to hear it! dan
that's a very easy addition and i can see how it might be generally useful; will definitely add.
Wonderfull! Many thanks for your quick responce.
Yours, Kas.
_______________________________________________ chuck-users mailing list chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users