Jaffe Synthesis Evaluation part II criteria 6 & 7

gpud
Mind Map by gpud, updated more than 1 year ago
gpud
Created by gpud about 6 years ago
1
0

Description

The second grouping of criteria from D jaffe's 1995 paper evaluating synthesis from the perspective of purpose, situation and aims for the user, rather than listing synthesis methods individually. Examples have been given to demonstrate each criteria. Part II focuses on the implementation and efficiencies that need to be considered for the processing environment, platform and system architecture, the limitations, constraints, power and memory.

Resource summary

Jaffe Synthesis Evaluation part II criteria 6 & 7
  1. how EFFICIENT is the ALGORITHM
    1. EXTREMELY IMP. - FOCUS OF MY DISSERTATION
      1. DETERMINES:
        1. 1. REALTIME
          1. NOS. VOICES AVAILABLE ON GIVEN HARDWARE
          2. 2. IN NON-REAL-TIME CONTEXTS -
            1. TIME OF WAITING FOR RESULTS OF COMPUTATIONS
              1. IN A FIXED AMOUNT OF TIME TO COMPLETE A PIECE AN EXTREMLY LONG FEWER ITERATIONS == LESS-REFINED RESULTSTURN AROUND TIME =
        2. QUOTE: "determining the efficiency of an algorithm is more complicated than it might at first appear. It is not merely a matter of comparing processing benchmarks. Numerous aspects of a technique and its implementation come into play,"
          1. The aspects of the GS techniques and their implementation that come into play can be divided into 3 categories:- a memory, b processing requirements c control stream heaviness
            1. IaMEMORY REQUIREMENTS
              1. SINE E.G.Amem - WAVETABLE SYNTH
                1. Mathews '69
                2. VARIABLE MEM REQ. Changes with the parameter values
                  1. Vm1 Karplus-Strong (plucked str) (waveguidebased MODELLING): MORE MEM LO Pitch LESS MEM HI Pitch
                3. Ib PROCESSING DETAILS
                  1. SINE.G.Bproc - ANALYTICAL COMPUTATION
                    1. Alt. techniques for sinewave generation
                      1. EGB1proc
                        1. marginally stable 2-POLE FILTERS
                        2. EGB2proc
                          1. EVAL. of COMPLEX PHASOR
                            1. Gordon, Smith '85
                          2. EGB3proc
                            1. WAVEGUIDES
                              1. Smith, Cook 92
                        3. II (b) PROCESSING POWER
                          1. 1. quite COMPLEX"
                            1. 2. depends on the PROCESSOR ARCHITECTURE
                              1. poor EXPENSIVE:
                                1. EGIIB
                                  1. Finite Element Modelling (numerical INTEGRATION of DIFFERENCE EQUATIONS that Descrb. Masses & Springs
                                    1. BUT wellsuited to: ARRAY - PARALLEL PROCESSORS
                                2. good EFFICIENT
                                  1. 1. active code fits within the CACHE of a RISC CHIP RUNS FASTER than an active code set that OVERFLOWS THE CACHE
                                    1. AFreed, Rodet and Depalle 93
                                    2. 2. With MINIMUM CHANGES in PROGRAM FLOW
                                      1. well supported by:
                                        1. a. DSP processors
                                          1. & other b. HEAVILY PIPELINED ARCHITECTURE
                                        2. PURPOSE BUILT HARDWARE INCREASES ENORMOULSY THE EFFICIENCY OF A TECHNIQUE
                                          1. GOOD
                                          2. B Some techniques have a PROCESSING REQUIRMENT that CHANGES with the PARAMETER VALUES
                                            1. Time domain implementation of CHANT
                                              1. more EXPENSIVE as FREQ RISES
                                                1. MORE PITCH PERIOD/SEC.
                                                  1. MORE ADDONS and more TABLE LOOKUPS PER OUTPUT SAMPLE
                                              2. Vm2 N harmonic partials in Trainlet synthesis - brightest timbre (chroma) = bandlimited pulse, softer timbre (low pass filtered, ie higher partials attenuated
                                                1. with MORE MEM/MORE PROC = NARROWER PEAK with 32 Harmonics than with 8 - changes behaviour of the technique
                                              3. Formant Wave Function FOF
                                                1. synth. by adding overlapping vocal tract IResp.
                                            2. c CONTROL STREAM ATTRIBUTES
                                              1. density/heaviness of control stream
                                                1. Problem esp. for RT impl.
                                                  1. may need 2 processors - then expensive processing to get data from control processor to the sound procesor
                                                    1. even wth just 1 processor - is their enough DISK SPACE/BW for the cntrl stream data ie is control stream density > RAM
                                                  2. Dispersion pattern:
                                                    1. sys. FAIL wth sporadic, CLUMPED, LARGE DENSE BURSTS of parameter update mess,
                                                      1. e.g. ENTIRE AMP ENV chngs with note data, at be of each note
                                                      2. more easily manageable: REL STEADY STREAM OF WELL-SPACED FAIRLY DENSE CNTRL MESS.
                                                        1. More EFF. feed ENV DATA BY BREAK POINT THRU THE NOTE 1 POINT AT A TIME
                                                    2. TRADE OFF
                                                      1. well known axiom
                                                        1. A single period of a waveform stored in memory
                                                          1. EGA1mem
                                                            1. use a non-interpolating 'drop-sample' oscillator
                                                              1. stored in memory in a HUGE TABLE
                                                                1. Greater Memory less processing
                                                                2. EGA2mem
                                                                  1. stored in memory in a SMALLER TABLE
                                                                    1. a more expensive OSC that interpolates between samples in the table
                                                                      1. Optimised Mem - but MEM < EG1 PROC> EG1
                                                                      2. EGA3mem
                                                                        1. Precomputed resultant. WAV: ƒ WAVE * A ENV
                                                                          1. MAX MEM MIN RT PROC
                                                              2. how SPARSE / DENSE is the CONTROL STREAM
                                                                1. what CLASS of SOUND can be represented
                                                                  1. what is SMALLEST possibel LATENCY
                                                                    1. do ANALYSIS TOOLS exist
                                                                      1. 1 to 5 relate to parameter behaviour, physical, intuitive, wellbehaved, perceptible changes, sound ID robust e.g. sounds good on more than 1 pitch/resonance of the instr.
                                                                        Show full summary Hide full summary

                                                                        Similar

                                                                        Evaluation of Explanations of Schizophrenia
                                                                        Charlotte97
                                                                        GCSE AQA Physics 1 Energy & Efficiency
                                                                        Lilac Potato
                                                                        Controversy: How efficient was the Nazi Regime?
                                                                        shann.w
                                                                        Evaluation of Conformity
                                                                        littlestephie
                                                                        Evaluation: Psychological Formulation
                                                                        Katie Greensted
                                                                        Evaluation: Social Causation Hypothesis as an Explanation for Schizophrenia
                                                                        Katie Greensted
                                                                        Evaluation: Drug Treatment for Anorexia
                                                                        Katie Greensted
                                                                        Markets in Action
                                                                        jam123es
                                                                        Evaluation: Genetic Explanation of Anorexia Nervosa
                                                                        Katie Greensted
                                                                        How does my media product represent particular social group?
                                                                        rutendomsonzams
                                                                        Sperry Evaluation
                                                                        mitchcharlie