Members chugheshc Posted January 8, 2006 Members Share Posted January 8, 2006 maybe you'd be better off building a rotating mic stand;with some sort of rotary interface for the connections, itwould have the same effect as a leslie with the bonus you couldmic anything with it, drums, vocals, ambient noise....C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kiwiburger Posted January 13, 2006 Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 I'd recommend a UFO drive. Your basic Intertial Hyperspace Warp Interstellar Overdrive should do the trick. Be careful when modulating the space time continum with square waves though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Walters9515 Posted January 13, 2006 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 Kiwi Do i know what kind of motor i can use to use a LFO triangle waveform input to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EerieDreamZ Posted January 13, 2006 Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Walters9515 Kiwi Do i know what kind of motor i can use to use a LFO triangle waveform input to? I dont know...do you? I know who you are but who am I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Walters9515 Posted January 13, 2006 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 I heard different "tube Power supplies" Leslie can make the Leslie motor rotate or wobble or spin different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EerieDreamZ Posted January 13, 2006 Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Kiwiburger I'd recommend a UFO drive. Your basic Intertial Hyperspace Warp Interstellar Overdrive should do the trick. Be careful when modulating the space time continum with square waves though. Are you SURE you wanna recommend something like that? Not to be a downer or anything, but THAT kind of advice could land someone on the other side of Uranus Be careful about that, Bud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EerieDreamZ Posted January 13, 2006 Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 Originally posted by Walters9515 I heard different "tube Power supplies" Leslie can make the Leslie motor rotate or wobble or spin different Interesting... http://pub17.bravenet.com/forum/1460065017/fetch/520700/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zuul777 Posted January 13, 2006 Members Share Posted January 13, 2006 Looks like Walters has been working on this one for almost a year! Good luck sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brittanylips Posted January 15, 2006 Members Share Posted January 15, 2006 Originally posted by Zooey The trick is to get the rotor spinning at the speed of light so that the soundwaves travel backwards through time and cross through themselves. Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe Now THAT'S a creative answer! It's wrong, but it's still good somehow. You know, it might work! As the rotors approach the speed of light, special relativity tells us that its movement through time (with respect to ours) will slow down. This effect is not just theoretical; it's been measured. It would be similar to observing a sound source fall into a black hole, with the observer watching and listening from a position safely beyond the event horizon. Assuming the sound source could withstand being spaghetti-fied by the gravitational waves (5th generation iPod?), as its speed accelerated to the speed of light, its movement through space-time would become infinately slow with respect to the observer. It would be the ultimate ptich shifter. -Peace, Love and Brittanylips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Walters9515 Posted January 15, 2006 Author Members Share Posted January 15, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted January 15, 2006 Members Share Posted January 15, 2006 Actually - the execution of the Walters character could learn a lot about "release of tension" from Britt et al It's the walters act that's snoozeville you were really starting to work on it there for a little bit eh, I figure trying new things..yeah they are going to fatigue the performer and I expect a couple of backwards steps, but KEEP trying!!! we'll get the walters act cleared up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Chao Posted January 17, 2006 Members Share Posted January 17, 2006 Originally posted by EerieDreamZ Interesting...http://pub17.bravenet.com/forum/1460065017/fetch/520700/ This is why he's more "disturbed individual with issues" than "brilliant tactician". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Originally posted by Brittanylips You know, it might work! As the rotors approach the speed of light, special relativity tells us that its movement through time (with respect to ours) will slow down. This effect is not just theoretical; it's been measured. It would be similar to observing a sound source fall into a black hole, with the observer watching and listening from a position safely beyond the event horizon. Assuming the sound source could withstand being spaghetti-fied by the gravitational waves (5th generation iPod?), as its speed accelerated to the speed of light, its movement through space-time would become infinately slow with respect to the observer. It would be the ultimate ptich shifter. -Peace, Love and Brittanylips The problem with that is that once something crosses the event horizon, it's completely invisible / inaudible to someone observing from the outside. Poof! Goodbye Leslie - never to be seen or heard again. Also, the engineering problems of building a Leslie (or anything else man-made for that matter) that could withstand that journey are currently insurmountable. But time dilation is a real phenomenon, and if you can get that Leslie rotor spinning fast enough, say .5 C, then there would be an observable / measureable time dilation effect. But you still have to deal with the acceleration / deceleration issues. You'd need one heck of a motor, and a serious brake on that Leslie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted January 17, 2006 Members Share Posted January 17, 2006 hmmm, sounds like instead of an AC motor we need a ouple of pulsars! not sure what to make the cab out of though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brittanylips Posted January 17, 2006 Members Share Posted January 17, 2006 Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe The problem with that is that once something crosses the event horizon, it's completely invisible / inaudible to someone observing from the outside. Poof! Goodbye Leslie - never to be seen or heard again. Interestingly enough, I believe current thinking suggests the opposite: from the position of the observer outside of the event horizon, it would appear that the Leslie would never actually fall into the black hole. To the observer outside of the black hole, the speaker would appear to rest on the precipice forever, its time becoming infinately slow with respect to "normal" space/time. Thus, no observable "poof." However, the Leslie itself would have the opposite experience, accelerating (to the speed of light) into the hole. Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe Also, the engineering problems of building a Leslie (or anything else man-made for that matter) that could withstand that journey are currently insurmountable. You know, those Leslies are really pretty bullet proof. I wouldn't be so quick to write it off. Not so sure about the recent crop of Leslie emulation plug-ins. Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe But time dilation is a real phenomenon, and if you can get that Leslie rotor spinning fast enough, say .5 C, then there would be an observable / measureable time dilation effect. But you still have to deal with the acceleration / deceleration issues. You'd need one heck of a motor, and a serious brake on that Leslie. I believe it's been measured using speeds as slow as airplane speed. So, hang the thing under a 747, play 'Fly Like An Eagle' through it ("time keeps on slippin slippin slippin..."), open up a Mountain Dew, and push record on a Sony PCM-D1 from high on the mountain top. -Peace, Love, and Brittttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt..... [falling into black hole] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MorePaul Posted January 17, 2006 Members Share Posted January 17, 2006 Originally posted by Brittanylips Interestingly enough, I believe current thinking suggests the opposite: from the position of the observer outside of the event horizon, it would appear that the Leslie would never actually fall into the black hole. To the observer outside of the black hole, the speaker would appear to rest on the precipice forever, its time becoming infinately slow with respect to "normal" space/time. Thus, no observable "poof." That's how I understand it, though my understanding is extremely tenuous and the the parts that are hanging on are hanging on to misconceptions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 17, 2006 Members Share Posted January 17, 2006 Kids, lurkers, engineers... I hope you are writing this all down. It's not every day that you get people who are equally conversant in pro audio and quantum mechanics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Interestingly enough, I believe current thinking suggests the opposite: from the position of the observer outside of the event horizon, it would appear that the Leslie would never actually fall into the black hole. To the observer outside of the black hole, the speaker would appear to rest on the precipice forever, its time becoming infinately slow with respect to "normal" space/time. Thus, no observable "poof." I've heard arguments for both... but essentially it's unimportant in terms of this discussion, because at anywhere near that velocity, it would appear to be "at rest" to an earthbound observer, as you indicated, which means no doppler shift. However, the Leslie itself would have the opposite experience, accelerating (to the speed of light) into the hole. I agree, and I don't think I've ever seen anything that would dispute that. We'll have to see if we can get Toxic Potatoe involved in this discussion - he's a genuinne MIT / CalTech trained physicist and physics professor. And he does calculus in his head. IOW, he's a LOT smarter than I am, especially in regards to this subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brittanylips Posted January 18, 2006 Members Share Posted January 18, 2006 Originally posted by Blips Interestingly enough, I believe current thinking suggests the opposite: from the position of the observer outside of the event horizon, it would appear that the Leslie would never actually fall into the black hole. To the observer outside of the black hole, the speaker would appear to rest on the precipice forever, its time becoming infinately slow with respect to "normal" space/time. Thus, no observable "poof." Originally posted by Phil I've heard arguments for both... but essentially it's unimportant in terms of this discussion, because at anywhere near that velocity, it would appear to be "at rest" to an earthbound observer, as you indicated, which means no doppler shift. Good point! Although, we are suspending an awful lot of disbelief. For example: no atmosphere/no sound/ no doppler. Plus, union rules specifically limit members moving any musical instrument (including music stands) closer than 1 AU to a black hole. -Peace, Love, and Brittanylips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EerieDreamZ Posted January 19, 2006 Members Share Posted January 19, 2006 Let us not forget the possiblity of "cascade Failure" at this juncture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Zooey Posted January 19, 2006 Members Share Posted January 19, 2006 Once again, Walters-related threads make up over 50% of all posts on the first page of this forum. Can we just rename it the "Walters Forum" and get it over with? I'm heading one level down to the forum where recording audio is still occasionally discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Originally posted by Zooey Once again, Walters-related threads make up over 50% of all posts on the first page of this forum. Can we just rename it the "Walters Forum" and get it over with? No, the forum name isn't going to be changing any time soon. But I understand your point about Walters, and have asked him not to "flood" the board with his topics. However, since you mentioned it, I thought I should check, and actually, there are currently only two "Walters" threads on page one. Which IMO, is not excessive. I'm heading one level down to the forum where recording audio is still occasionally discussed. Recording is still discussed in here too. But by all means, feel free to pop into Mark's forum - I do so from time to time myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members donuts Posted January 20, 2006 Members Share Posted January 20, 2006 i think all of you are making this much more difficult than it need be... to answer Walters question... you simply use this: flux capacitor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Uma Floresta Posted January 30, 2007 Members Share Posted January 30, 2007 Oops, I bumped! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.