So grab and install dsproxy (http://freshmeat.net/projects/dsproxy/), and
capture the output. Than feed to e.g. XMMS which already has an AGC plugin.
t
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:44:32PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > So my question is, what would it take to get some automatic software
> > volume
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:46:20PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
> support for NUMA hardware (it's not cache coherent) right now
btw, there are three kind of NUMA systems:
1) cc-numa first citizens (wildfire alpha, future chips)
2) cc-numa second citizens (origin2k)
> So my question is, what would it take to get some automatic software
> volume correction going. This looks like it would be the easiest fix
> of all.
Unfortunately its encoded in a proprietary format otherwise it would have
been perhaps half an hours work to write an AGC filter for the data.
Miles Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> http://www.osdn.com/conferences/kernel/
>
> Thanks to all responsible for getting these captures
> of the Kernel 2.5 Workshop prosentations put together.
>
> There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> Usually, only the comments of the
> Being an outsider, I'm still trying to find out WTF happened
> on friday evening when NUMA was discussed. I can't find any
> video, audio, or even technical notes. This sucks; I'm writing
> support for NUMA hardware (it's not cache coherent) right now
> and I don't have any idea where things
Being an outsider, I'm still trying to find out WTF happened
on friday evening when NUMA was discussed. I can't find any
video, audio, or even technical notes. This sucks; I'm writing
support for NUMA hardware (it's not cache coherent) right now
and I don't have any idea where things will be
Miles Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.osdn.com/conferences/kernel/
Thanks to all responsible for getting these captures
of the Kernel 2.5 Workshop prosentations put together.
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the
So my question is, what would it take to get some automatic software
volume correction going. This looks like it would be the easiest fix
of all.
Unfortunately its encoded in a proprietary format otherwise it would have
been perhaps half an hours work to write an AGC filter for the data.
So grab and install dsproxy (http://freshmeat.net/projects/dsproxy/), and
capture the output. Than feed to e.g. XMMS which already has an AGC plugin.
t
On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:44:32PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
So my question is, what would it take to get some automatic software
volume
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 10:46:20PM -0400, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
support for NUMA hardware (it's not cache coherent) right now
btw, there are three kind of NUMA systems:
1) cc-numa first citizens (wildfire alpha, future chips)
2) cc-numa second citizens (origin2k)
Theodore Tso writes:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>> It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
>> at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
>> kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table (which
>>
Theodore Tso wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> >
> > It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
> > at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
> > kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
> at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
> kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table (which
> isn't all that practical
On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Miles Lane wrote:
>> hand someone a mike.
>
>I like this idea quite a bit. It would probably not
>be terribly expensive to rent/buy the required equipment,
>it would be easy to use and would not be terribly disruptive
>to the preceedings.
>
>I'm curious, didn't you find
On Mon, 16 Apr 2001, Miles Lane wrote:
hand someone a mike.
I like this idea quite a bit. It would probably not
be terribly expensive to rent/buy the required equipment,
it would be easy to use and would not be terribly disruptive
to the preceedings.
I'm curious, didn't you find that those
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table (which
isn't all that practical
Theodore Tso wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table (which
isn't
Theodore Tso writes:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:53:19PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
It does not work in a relaxed "people sit at tables and comment
at arbitrary points in time during a talk" setting such as the
kernel summit. Besides putting a microphone at every table (which
isn't all
Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> > Are you talking about one of those "eavesdropper"
> > parabolic microphones? Are you thinking of having
> > someone on stage redirecting the microphone as
> > each speaker starts talking? It could work well,
> > but you'd either lose the first few words each
> > person
> Are you talking about one of those "eavesdropper"
> parabolic microphones? Are you thinking of having
> someone on stage redirecting the microphone as
> each speaker starts talking? It could work well,
> but you'd either lose the first few words each
> person in the audience said or need to
Larry McVoy wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:46:33PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> > Randolph Bentson wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> > > > There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> > > > Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:46:33PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> Randolph Bentson wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> > > There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> > > Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> > > can be heard.
> >
> > I've
Randolph Bentson wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> > There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> > Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> > can be heard.
>
> I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
> microphone was put inside
Ben Ford wrote:
>
> Randolph Bentson wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> >
> >>There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> >>Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> >>can be heard.
> >>
> >
> >I've heard of conferences where a wireless
Randolph Bentson wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
>
>>There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
>>Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
>>can be heard.
>>
>
>I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
>microphone was put inside a Nerf
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
> There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> can be heard.
I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
microphone was put inside a Nerf ball. It could
then be tossed to
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Miles Lane writes:
> > There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> > Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> > can be heard.
>
> The problem is that nobody wants to wait for one of the microphones to
> go across the entire room before they can
Miles Lane writes:
> There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
> Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
> can be heard.
The problem is that nobody wants to wait for one of the microphones to
go across the entire room before they can begin speaking, this is what
was happening.
http://www.osdn.com/conferences/kernel/
Thanks to all responsible for getting these captures
of the Kernel 2.5 Workshop prosentations put together.
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard. This reduces the value of
http://www.osdn.com/conferences/kernel/
Thanks to all responsible for getting these captures
of the Kernel 2.5 Workshop prosentations put together.
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard. This reduces the value of
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
microphone was put inside a Nerf ball. It could
then be tossed to the
Randolph Bentson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
microphone was put inside a Nerf ball. It
Ben Ford wrote:
Randolph Bentson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
microphone was
Randolph Bentson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
I've heard of conferences where a wireless audience
microphone was put inside a Nerf
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:46:33PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
Randolph Bentson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
I've heard of
Larry McVoy wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 08:46:33PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
Randolph Bentson wrote:
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 05:45:31PM -0700, Miles Lane wrote:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
Are you talking about one of those "eavesdropper"
parabolic microphones? Are you thinking of having
someone on stage redirecting the microphone as
each speaker starts talking? It could work well,
but you'd either lose the first few words each
person in the audience said or need to go to
Larry McVoy wrote:
Are you talking about one of those "eavesdropper"
parabolic microphones? Are you thinking of having
someone on stage redirecting the microphone as
each speaker starts talking? It could work well,
but you'd either lose the first few words each
person in the
Miles Lane writes:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
The problem is that nobody wants to wait for one of the microphones to
go across the entire room before they can begin speaking, this is what
was happening.
"David S. Miller" wrote:
Miles Lane writes:
There is one major shortcoming of the recordings.
Usually, only the comments of the presenter(s)
can be heard.
The problem is that nobody wants to wait for one of the microphones to
go across the entire room before they can begin
40 matches
Mail list logo
