Am 25.10.2018 um 12:17 schrieb gm:
(also I am doing the pitch shift the wrong way at the moment,
first transpose in time domain, then FFT time stretch, cause that was
easier to do for now
but this shouldn't cause an audible problem here)
Now I think that flaw is actually the way to go
In
the same sample as before, rearranged and sequenced, transposed
sound quality and latency aside, I think the idea has some potential
https://soundcloud.com/traumlos_kalt/spectromat-test-4-01/s-7W2tR
the second part is from Nancy Sinatras Summervine
I am sorry it's all drenched in a resonant m
here an example at 22050 hz sample rate, FFT size 1024, smoothing for
the spectral envelope 10 bins,
and simple phase realignment: when amplitude is greater than last frames
amplitude
phase is set to original phase, otherwise to the accumulated phase of
the time stretch
didn't expect th
One thing I noticed is that it seems to sound better at 22050 Hz sample rate
so I assume 1024 FFT size is too small and you should use 2048.
I dont know if that is because the DC band is too high or if the bins
are too broadband with 1024, or both?
I assume with this and some phase realingment
Hmm. For me the "reply-to" in the original email header is set to "music-dsp
@music.columbia.edu".
If I hit Reply it goes to the list.
I recall being annoyed by Reply going to the person and not the list. Why
am I seeing something different? I am using GMail web client.
And BTW, I set my default
I made a quick test,
original first, then resynthesized with time stretch and pitch shift and
corrected formants:
https://soundcloud.com/traumlos_kalt/ft-resynth-test-1-01/s-7GCLk
https://soundcloud.com/traumlos_kalt/ft-resynth-test-2-01/s-2OJ2H
sounds quite phasey and gurgely
I am using 1024
Dear Music DSP people,
The submission deadline for the "Making Sense of Sounds" (MSoS) Data Challenge
(http://cvssp.org/projects/making_sense_of_sounds/site/challenge/) is fast
approaching:
** Submission deadline: 30 October 2018 **
Direct links:
* Development & Evaluation data:
