- From: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 06:51:20 -0700
- To: lonce wyse <lonce.wyse@zwhome.org>
- Cc: public-audio@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAJK2wqUoxa6GXQXqjRGN_3WYn4wvZwDTs1eNa+WXnTQ4KnHknw@mail.gmail.com>
No, I knew that - Matt had said when he looped it previously, he could hear a perceptual looping effect. On Jul 19, 2012 6:32 AM, "lonce wyse" <lonce.wyse@zwhome.org> wrote: > > Hello, > > I don't think anything is broken. > If you listen to his drone (with non-looping noise) you can hear a > slow evolution of timbre. This is due to the subtle differences in > frequency content being generated by the different noise sources over time, > combined with his extremely narrow filters on each source. > If you can hear the slow variation in time given his original > algorithm, then it is clear that using 2-second looping noise sources > (assuming they all had the same loop durations) would create an audible > 2-second repeating pattern. > No need to fix anything! > > - lonce > -- > Lonce Wyse, Associate Professor > Communications and New Media > Director, IDMI Arts and Creativity Lab > National University of Singapore > www.anclab.org <http://anclap.org> > > > On 17/7/2012 12:49 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Hmm. If there is a perceptible looping effect, that's broken and should > be fixed. (I used looped noise in the web audio vocoder ( > webaudiovocoder.appspot.com, needs Chrome Dev channel or better), and > never noticed a problem.) If you happen to run across it again, could you > forward me a repro case? > > -C > > > On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Matt Diamond <mdiamond@jhu.edu> wrote: > >> Thanks for the tip! An earlier version of this did in fact use >> pre-computed noise buffers, but I felt there was a vaguely perceptible >> "looping" effect because of the looping noise sample (it was a cool effect >> though). Another reason was that I was presenting a version of this script >> at a meetup, and felt like utilizing a JavaScriptAudioNode for real-time >> noise generation would be more interesting to demonstrate... but yes, it >> certainly takes a bit of a toll, and running a bunch of AudioBufferSource >> nodes would probably be much less taxing. >> >> Still, I'm pretty impressed that the API is able to handle so much, >> even if it's only on higher-end machines (I'm running it on a year-old >> MacBook Pro). >> >> Matt >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> wrote: >> >>> Hey Matt- >>> >>> Neat! I like the apparent pitch generated by bandpass filter. >>> >>> One comment - instead of continually generating noise via >>> JavaScriptAudioNodes, you'd probably find it much more performant to >>> pre-generate a couple of seconds (to avoid any detectable periodicity) of >>> noise in a Buffer and playing it as an AudioNode. That would probably be a >>> bit more performant than continually calling Math.random for each sample. >>> >>> var lengthInSamples = 2 * audioContext.sampleRate; >>> var noiseBuffer = audioContext.createBuffer(1, lengthInSamples, >>> audioContext.sampleRate); >>> var bufferData = noiseBuffer.getChannelData(0); >>> for (var i = 0; i < lengthInSamples; ++i) { >>> bufferData[i] = (2*Math.random() - 1); >>> } >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Matt Diamond <mdiamond@jhu.edu> wrote: >>> >>>> Hey all, >>>> >>>> Put together a little experiment in synthesizing an ambient sound >>>> texture using the Web Audio API: >>>> >>>> http://matt-diamond.com/drone.html >>>> >>>> Matt >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > > <http://anclap.org> >
Received on Thursday, 19 July 2012 13:51:49 UTC