Displaying 5 results from an estimated 5 matches for "sparge".
Did you mean:
  spare
  
2007 Apr 29
0
Ambisonic Systems
> I assume, somewhere, someone has a compendium of recommended hardware for ambisonics?  Something to sanity check/inform equipment selections of someone building My First Ambisonics Rig?
Not at all Monty.  This is an important question and I am ashamed to say I can't point you to a good answer.
In the meantime, have a look at
Permananent Ambisonic Systems	from
2007 Apr 16
3
Re : Ambisonics in Ogg Vorbis
>I have been giving some thought to how to include Ambisonics in Ogg Vorbis.
As I understand it, 
mapping type = 1
was meant from the start to indicate an Ambisonic stream.  The only other information required is the number of channels which thanks to Mr Leese's clever trick tells us exactly which Ambisonic channels are used up to 3rd order.
__________________
>The channel coupling
2005 Oct 23
0
brewing stats
I guess this isn't so much of a help request as a show-and-tell from a 
non-statistician homebrewer who has been fumbling around with R.  If 
nothing else it provides yet another data set.  I hope it is not out of 
line.
Anyway, the plots I have produced are at
	http://brewiki.org/BatchSparge#poll
The polling method is somewhat simple, its just one of those multiple 
choice style polls you can create on various web forums.
The poll was prompted by the ongoing claim from fly spargers that 
"their" method is more efficient, but I had never seen data to support 
that.  I though...
2007 Jan 18
16
5.1 surround channel coupling
It obviously would be nice to have such a mode available, for e.g. DVD audio
compression. Apparently, the list doesn''t tell me too much about it. My
questions are:
1. What is the current status of the 5.1 channel coupling in Vorbis?
2. If I''ll be interested in participation in its development, what is the
recommended reading?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML
2009 Jun 03
11
Centos 5.3 -> Apache - Under Attack ? Oh hell....
Guys, apache cpus usage is hitting 100% sometimes ( to such an extent that its very noticeable)  on a box with just 8 users or so.
i m getting this when i run 'top'. The worrying thing is seeing the work 'atack' under command
PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
23119 apache    15   0   964  556  472 S  0.7  0.0   0:03.68 atack
23479 apache    15