������������������������������������������������������������������
I was able to create the line above while composing this reply and it looks
like an underline. I wonder how the line will appear when I view this after
posting?
However, Viewing your message, the underline looks like a series of power
transmission towers.
Not a big deal, Jerry, I was just curious.
"Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:qISdnVLG0ZDV4zrbnZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@rcn.net...
> BobF wrote:
>> "Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
>> news:DbidnR4Dj81MMTvbnZ2dnUVZ_ryqnZ2d@rcn.net...
>>> BobF wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> Jerry - what is the wrapped line of funny looking A symbols supposed to
>>>> be? I view everything in plain text, maybe that's why I don't get it.
>>>>
>>>> Just curious
>>> It's called "macron" and serves as an full-width high dash. When it
>>> displays properly, if forms an underline for the line above it. It's
>>> character U+00AF; alt+0175.
>>>
>>> Jerry
>>> --
>>> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>
>> OK. Funny, this particular post shows the underline as it's supposed to
>> be. But only this one.
>
> This time I replaced macron with underline. The line you see is nearly a
> full line lower than my normal placement. If you're in Windows, type 0175
> in the numeric pad (numlock doesn't matter) while holding down Alt.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by Jerry Avins●July 25, 20072007-07-25
BobF wrote:
> "Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
> news:DbidnR4Dj81MMTvbnZ2dnUVZ_ryqnZ2d@rcn.net...
>> BobF wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Jerry - what is the wrapped line of funny looking A symbols supposed to
>>> be? I view everything in plain text, maybe that's why I don't get it.
>>>
>>> Just curious
>> It's called "macron" and serves as an full-width high dash. When it
>> displays properly, if forms an underline for the line above it. It's
>> character U+00AF; alt+0175.
>>
>> Jerry
>> --
>> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> OK. Funny, this particular post shows the underline as it's supposed to be.
> But only this one.
This time I replaced macron with underline. The line you see is nearly a
full line lower than my normal placement. If you're in Windows, type
0175 in the numeric pad (numlock doesn't matter) while holding down Alt.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by BobF●July 25, 20072007-07-25
"Jerry Avins" <jya@ieee.org> wrote in message
news:DbidnR4Dj81MMTvbnZ2dnUVZ_ryqnZ2d@rcn.net...
> BobF wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> Jerry - what is the wrapped line of funny looking A symbols supposed to
>> be? I view everything in plain text, maybe that's why I don't get it.
>>
>> Just curious
>
> It's called "macron" and serves as an full-width high dash. When it
> displays properly, if forms an underline for the line above it. It's
> character U+00AF; alt+0175.
>
> Jerry
> --
> Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
> _______________________________________________________________________
OK. Funny, this particular post shows the underline as it's supposed to be.
But only this one.
Thanks
Reply by Richard Dobson●July 25, 20072007-07-25
Jerry Avins wrote:
> Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
>
>> ... Why it is so difficult to build a model based audio?
>
>
> Ignorance?
>
Accurate physical modelling is still quite demanding in CPU terms, and
if the best outcome is that it sounds (to the average ear) just as good
as sampling, the easier and cheaper option will win. Physical modelling
for games is a very active research topic (e.g. for sonically realistic
collisions, impacts, etc effects); its appearance in games may depend on
factors such as availability of high-level tools. Also, frankly,
real-life sounds are very dull with little or no 'emotional impact";
does anyone believe for example that the sounds one hears in films are
true-to-life? Even the dialog is re-recorded, 99% of the time, an inch
from a microphone in a clean dry acoustic. All the ambience is
artifical, to say nothing of the vast amount of Foley that is used.
I read a comprehensive account of the sound design for "Titanic" (i
think, in Audio Media, might have been Studio Sound); great care was
taken to develop the sounds of the creaking of the ship, progressively,
so that they sounded more aweful and frightening as the film reached its
climax. Some 200 different sounds were used. Those sounds were sampled
and processed from a variety of sources, none of which (IIRC) originated
on any ship. The rhetorical effect of sound is far more important than
how "realistic" it is. And the truth is that most people are not audile
to the extent that they notice such things with discrimination. Nobody
even bothers complaining about explosions and whoosh sounds in space any
more, because, as was stated very simply by someone on TV not very long
ago, "silence is boring".
Actually, very little on either TV or film is realistic in an objective
sense; clearly games are no different in principle. The danger of
literally accurate physical modelling is that the result will be just as
dull as the real thing!
Richard Dobson
Reply by Jerry Avins●July 24, 20072007-07-24
Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> ... Why it is so difficult to build a model based audio?
Ignorance?
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Reply by Jerry Avins●July 24, 20072007-07-24
BobF wrote:
...
> Jerry - what is the wrapped line of funny looking A symbols supposed to be?
> I view everything in plain text, maybe that's why I don't get it.
>
> Just curious
It's called "macron" and serves as an full-width high dash. When it
displays properly, if forms an underline for the line above it. It's
character U+00AF; alt+0175.
Jerry
--
Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
_______________________________________________________________________
Reply by Vladimir Vassilevsky●July 24, 20072007-07-24
Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>Why the fairly sophisticated synthetic audio is perceived as
>>>>disgustful whereas the primitive synthetic video is OK?
>>>
>
> For a video counter example, do a web search on "Uncanny Valley".
>
Straight to the point as usual, Tim!
In the short, if something resembles a defective human, it is very
unpleasant. The clearly non human objects are perceived better then that.
I wonder which side of the valley is closer to me :-)
VLV
Reply by Tim Wescott●July 24, 20072007-07-24
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:22:05 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky wrote:
> Jerry Avins wrote:
>
>
>>>
>>> Why the fairly sophisticated synthetic audio is perceived as
>>> disgustful whereas the primitive synthetic video is OK?
>>
>>
>> Audible distortion is generally more objectionable than visual
>> distortion. Do you think that may be related to your question?
>
> This is not it. A low bitrate vocoder produces the speech of the toll
> quality, despite of the distortion of somewhat 30% if compared to the
> original sound. But the full synthetic narrator always sounds like
> rotten. Why it is so difficult to build a model based audio?
>
> VLV
Model based audio from musical instruments isn't that bad -- it's the
human voice that's hard.
For a video counter example, do a web search on "Uncanny Valley".
--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Reply by Vladimir Vassilevsky●July 24, 20072007-07-24
Jerry Avins wrote:
>>
>> Why the fairly sophisticated synthetic audio is perceived as
>> disgustful whereas the primitive synthetic video is OK?
>
>
> Audible distortion is generally more objectionable than visual
> distortion. Do you think that may be related to your question?
This is not it. A low bitrate vocoder produces the speech of the toll
quality, despite of the distortion of somewhat 30% if compared to the
original sound. But the full synthetic narrator always sounds like
rotten. Why it is so difficult to build a model based audio?
VLV