Indeed. This debate is getting tiresome.
> On Aug 21, 2015, at 8:59 PM, wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Peter S
> To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
> Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 6:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [music-dsp] Compensate for interpolation high frequency signal
> loss
>
> On 22/08/2015, Ethan
On January 9, 2012 at 3:02:04 PM Veronica Merryfield
veronica.merryfield@shaw.cawrote:
> The Synergy was also an FM machine and could do everything the DX-7 could do
> just it wasn't packaged or priced that way.
I would say, in fact, that the Synergy was _primarily_ an "FM" machine. One of
I get paid to write, so I'm no stranger to research. I have edited the work of
others and had my work edited. Many here can say the same, I'm sure. With that
background I have tried to edit articles on Wikipedia. IMO, Wikipedia is
fundamentally a bad idea. Trying to rescue it is a fool's errand.
On Wednesday, January 11, 2012 6:41:08 AM Didier Dambrin di...@skynet.be wrote:
> But it's still the place I'd trust the most.
It would seem likely then that you believe the results of the informal study
(not peer reviewed) by Nature back in 2005 that found Wikipedia had only
32% more errors
Can anyone point me to a good tutorial about or explanation of Modified FM? I
am aware of Victor's paper 'Theory and Practice of Modified Frequency
Modulation Synthesis', which I assume contains what I need, but since it's an
AES document I can't access it (or more correctly I refuse to pay the
