[sdiy] Tape head collage (pretty much not synth DIY, sorry)

[Ian Fritz]

It would have been more precise of him to have refered to them as 
circular/spiral phase-space orbits and the temporal waveforms derived from 
them.  However, since one-dimensional circles/spirals don't exist, it was 
obvious what he was talking about.  The one-dimensional waves derived from 
the orbits by projection are the more familiar temporal waveforms.  These 
are the components of the orbits along particular directions.  If you use 
two of these in a patch, then you *are* truly using circular/spiral waves.

He didn't express himself very well, but not all that much wore than the 
typical web poster.  The difficulty, as I see it, is that none of his 
readers knew anything about nonlinear dynamics.  Hardly his fault.

It may be true that you always think in terms of signal vs time 
waveforms.  However, people who work on non-linear dynamics more often make 
use of orbits, ie, a geometrical description.  For example, when you do 
this you learn that temporal chaos is equivalent to spatial fractals.

Hope this helps.

   Ian



At 06:23 PM 11/19/2004, Tim Parkhurst wrote:
>Well, perhaps I should clarify. From what I can understand, the waveforms we
>normally speak of are a representation of time vs. voltage. They are
>basically a graphic representation of a real time audio event. In this
>context, a circular / spiral waveform is clearly impossible, unless you can
>go backwards in time for part of the cycle ("what value flux capacitor
>should I use in my VCO?").
>
>Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the waveforms you show on your link are
>a representation of voltage X vs. voltage Y. We've all seen patterns like
>this, and similar patterns are fairly easy to create with a couple of
>oscillators and a dual trace scope. The poster I was referring to was
>someone who was talking about a spiral AUDIO waveform which, again if we're
>talking about time vs. voltage / real time event, is not possible. I truly
>tried to understand the guy, but I really think he was operating under a
>basically flawed argument.