Tim Goetze <tim(a)quitte.de> writes: RDF, so it's possible to categorize it and look it up quickly;). OT: I think it's wrong to write the type names as plurals. A formal categorization should not use plurals. It's the "Generator" group, not the "Generators" group, f.ex. -- Esben Stien is b0ef@e s a http://www. s t n m irc://irc. b - i . e/%23contact [sip|iax]: e e jid:b0ef@ n n

On Thu, Jan 12, 2006 at 03:48:50 +0100, Esben Stien wrote: Its a perosnaly preference thing, rdf types are classes, and in english you talk about the "class of generators"*. But, the RDF type URIs are just symbols for machine consupmtion, they have (should have?) labels that can be used for display purposes, and they can read whatever you like. * though I generally use the singular, dunno why I chose plural that day - Steve

[Giuseppe Zompatori] To tell the truth, I've never evaluated different -O settings (neither have I looked up their implication of other optimization flags). I'll keep it in mind, but it's not the highest priority. Also, the benefits of different -O and other flags might differ on PPC, x86, x86+sse, x86+sse2, x86-64, amd or intel etc. I'd happily be convinced by some hard facts (code size vs. execution speed) though. :) Why yes, AmpV actually models a (granted, _very_ simple but nonetheless sweet to my ears) approximation of output stage saturation. True, it's a single preamp tube. There used to be two, just like in the real circuits I've analyzed, but the effects of the first one are far too subtle to make a palpable difference in tone. Thus, it fell victim to optimization. You're forgetting the influence of output transformers on the tone, which is just as important as the power amplification tube stage, plus the non-linear effects of the final output speakers! :) Not that I have anything against modelling all these effects better. Yet, we're talking about a few months of work here, mostly analysis of real circuits and speakers in theory as well as in operation. And, see below .. My opinion is that these effects only become a major tone-forming factor if the amp in question is driven _real_ hard (master gain close or at maximum, up to this the data I have gathered from my real amp indicates it's all fairly linear). I've always been playing small amps at moderate volume in real life, and the only time I ever played one in the vicinity of maximum output power, the output transformer melted down within minutes. Not my cup of tea, thank you. (I didn't even like the sound while it lasted. Go figure :) Have you tried raising the AmpV 'watts' parameter to its maximum setting? The effect you describe should be completely gone by then with AmpV. Also, AmpV has never been designed with high-gain scenarios in mind. With AmpIV however, what you describe is not the expected behaviour. Does the AmpIV from caps-0.2.3 give the same effect? In any event, can you send me your AmpIV settings (and other plugins' settings making up the FX chain) and a short input signal sample so I can recreate the problem? Well, glad you found an escape route, and sorry for wasting your time with my poor efforts! :) In the end, it seems the two of us are after a different kind of guitar tone. I've been playing AmpV in a jam lately and not once over the course of the session have I felt the need to fiddle with the sound (and that's a first). I'm more than happy with it, sorry to hear you're not. Thanks for your feedback, I appreciate it, Cheers, Tim