20 Feb
2010
20 Feb
'10
6:26 p.m.
To all, for your information.
I have received the following message from Mr. Nick Copeland.
It was sent privately, but since this is the continuation of
a thread on this list and the person concerned has well gone
beyond any reasonable limits of decent behaviour I feel free
to post it here.
*** Start included message ***
The last time I looked at the AMS source code I was under the impression
that the Moog VCF filters were not actually yours, they were Tossavainen
and Kellets. They were published eventually placed on musicdsp.org however
there are a couple of things here:
1. In their original publishing they did not advocate the use of
quantisation of their parameters - you implemented this as an
adaptation of their algorithm.
2. In not quoting the original authors you are plagiarism them.
In the source to AMS they are quoted however it is bit disingenious
to imply that this was 'your' MoogVCF.
In short you did not actually write the 'Moog' VCF parts and
suggesting that this is how their algorithms worked is just
attempting to justify quantisation to 1/16 is not deleterious
to quality which is definitely not attributable to the original
authors.
From what you are saying I would like to just say you
are an
arrogant selfpublicist however base on the claims in your email
you are actually a lying plagiarst.
Regards nick.
*** End included message ***
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
20 Feb
20 Feb
6:36 p.m.
Hi Fons,
You are welcome to post this on LAD. I would have done so as well except
if you remember from your original reply, it was directly to me and not the
list, so I thought I would be similarly respectful and only send my response
back to you,
Kindest regards, nick.
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:22:38 +0100
From: fons(a)kokkinizita.net
To: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: [LAD] For your information
To all, for your information.
I have received the following message from Mr. Nick Copeland.
It was sent privately, but since this is the continuation of
a thread on this list and the person concerned has well gone
beyond any reasonable limits of decent behaviour I feel free
to post it here.
*** Start included message ***
The last time I looked at the AMS source code I was under the impression
that the Moog VCF filters were not actually yours, they were Tossavainen
and Kellets. They were published eventually placed on musicdsp.org however
there are a couple of things here:
1. In their original publishing they did not advocate the use of
quantisation of their parameters - you implemented this as an
adaptation of their algorithm.
2. In not quoting the original authors you are plagiarism them.
In the source to AMS they are quoted however it is bit disingenious
to imply that this was 'your' MoogVCF.
In short you did not actually write the 'Moog' VCF parts and
suggesting that this is how their algorithms worked is just
attempting to justify quantisation to 1/16 is not deleterious
to quality which is definitely not attributable to the original
authors.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
From what you are saying I would like to just say
you are an
arrogant selfpublicist however base on the claims in your email
you are actually a lying plagiarst.
Regards nick.
*** End included message ***
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
7:13 p.m.
Hi Fons,
Both of these are your quotes from your last two email. These might
have been directly to me however you chose to take it on to the list:
BTW, the code I referred to is a set of plugins, it is
not part of AMS.
> Returning to 'cutting corners', my MoogVCF filter is also
> regarded as one of the best. It operates a described
> above - it cuts a lot of corners, and certainly does not
> accept audio rate control, even if the interface is at
> audio rate (as is everyhting in AMS for which it was
> written).As I just reponded to you directly, but as you seem to want to make this
public for reasons that I truly don't understand, let me put this one back
on the list.
You did not write the MoogVCF filter for AMS. You may have adapted
other peoples work, acknowledging that one thing, but let us be honest
here, trying to take credit for their work is plagiarism.
The code that you evidently did not write which was not a part of AMS
(according to you) was a part of AMS (also according to you). So again,
either you are a liar, or a self publicist, and either way, your claim to
me that it was 'your MoogVCF' is plagiarism and that was part of my
private email to you,
Kindest regards, nick.
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
From: nickycopeland(a)hotmail.com
To: fons(a)kokkinizita.net; linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:36:04 +0100
Subject: Re: [LAD] For your information
Hi Fons,
You are welcome to post this on LAD. I would have done so as well except
if you remember from your original reply, it was directly to me and not the
list, so I thought I would be similarly respectful and only send my response
back to you,
Kindest regards, nick.
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:22:38 +0100
From: fons(a)kokkinizita.net
To: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: [LAD] For your information
To all, for your information.
I have received the following message from Mr. Nick Copeland.
It was sent privately, but since this is the continuation of
a thread on this list and the person concerned has well gone
beyond any reasonable limits of decent behaviour I feel free
to post it here.
*** Start included message ***
The last time I looked at the AMS source code I was under the impression
that the Moog VCF filters were not actually yours, they were Tossavainen
and Kellets. They were published eventually placed on musicdsp.org however
there are a couple of things here:
1. In their original publishing they did not advocate the use of
quantisation of their parameters - you implemented this as an
adaptation of their algorithm.
2. In not quoting the original authors you are plagiarism them.
In the source to AMS they are quoted however it is bit disingenious
to imply that this was 'your' MoogVCF.
In short you did not actually write the 'Moog' VCF parts and
suggesting that this is how their algorithms worked is just
attempting to justify quantisation to 1/16 is not deleterious
to quality which is definitely not attributable to the original
authors.
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
From what you are saying I would like to just say
you are an
arrogant selfpublicist however base on the claims in your email
you are actually a lying plagiarst.
Regards nick.
*** End included message ***
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev 
8:01 p.m.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 12:13:33AM +0100, Nick Copeland wrote:
Hi Fons,
Both of these are your quotes from your last two email. These might
have been directly to me however you chose to take it on to the list:
what are you trying to say ?
he said he wrote a ladspa plugin.
and he wrote it "for" ams, because it uses ams CV conventions for
frequency.
so the major usecase for this plugin is "being used in ams".
lets argue that people just stuck the schematic for a moog filter into a
bilinear transform and take the credit which belongs to mr. moog.
oh wait ... they all name the filter moog filter.
BTW, the code I referred to is a set of plugins,
it is not part of AMS.
> Returning to 'cutting corners', my MoogVCF filter is also
> regarded as one of the best. It operates a described
> above - it cuts a lot of corners, and certainly does not
> accept audio rate control, even if the interface is at
> audio rate (as is everyhting in AMS for which it was
> written).As I just reponded to you directly, but as you seem to want to make this
public for reasons that I truly don't understand, let me put this one back
on the list.
You did not write the MoogVCF filter for AMS. You may have adapted
other peoples work, acknowledging that one thing, but let us be honest
here, trying to take credit for their work is plagiarism.
The code that you evidently did not write which was not a part of AMS
(according to you) was a part of AMS (also according to you). So again,
either you are a liar, or a self publicist, and either way, your claim to
me that it was 'your MoogVCF' is plagiarism and that was part of my
private email to you,
Kindest regards, nick.
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
From: nickycopeland(a)hotmail.com
To: fons(a)kokkinizita.net; linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:36:04 +0100
Subject: Re: [LAD] For your information
Hi Fons,
You are welcome to post this on LAD. I would have done so as well except
if you remember from your original reply, it was directly to me and not the
list, so I thought I would be similarly respectful and only send my response
back to you,
Kindest regards, nick.
"we have to make sure the old choice [Windows] doesn't disappear”.
Jim Wong, president of IT products, Acer
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:22:38 +0100
From: fons(a)kokkinizita.net
To: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: [LAD] For your information
To all, for your information.
I have received the following message from Mr. Nick Copeland.
It was sent privately, but since this is the continuation of
a thread on this list and the person concerned has well gone
beyond any reasonable limits of decent behaviour I feel free
to post it here.
*** Start included message ***
The last time I looked at the AMS source code I was under the impression
that the Moog VCF filters were not actually yours, they were Tossavainen
and Kellets. They were published eventually placed on musicdsp.org however
there are a couple of things here:
1. In their original publishing they did not advocate the use of
quantisation of their parameters - you implemented this as an
adaptation of their algorithm.
2. In not quoting the original authors you are plagiarism them.
In the source to AMS they are quoted however it is bit disingenious
to imply that this was 'your' MoogVCF.
In short you did not actually write the 'Moog' VCF parts and
suggesting that this is how their algorithms worked is just
attempting to justify quantisation to 1/16 is not deleterious
to quality which is definitely not attributable to the original
authors.
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969 From what you are saying I would like to just say
you are an
arrogant selfpublicist however base on the claims in your email
you are actually a lying plagiarst.
Regards nick.
*** End included message ***
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev _______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
--
torben Hohn
8:27 p.m.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 01:02:27AM +0100, torbenh wrote:
lets argue that people just stuck the schematic for a
moog filter into a
bilinear transform
There's a bit more to it, and part of that is explained
in the README for MCP-plugins. Which also credits the
authors (Stilson and Smith) I consulted when writing
those plugins, now seven years ago.
Reading this old stuff again, it seems the plugins use
Fs/16 as the effective control rate - I had completely
forgotten about that :-)
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
21 Feb
21 Feb
6 a.m.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 3:23 AM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 01:02:27AM +0100, torbenh
wrote:
Reading this old stuff again, it seems the plugins use
Fs/16 as the effective control rate - I had completely
forgotten about that :-)
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Aah, the immortality of good ideas.
:)
--
www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
development-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
5:36 p.m.
Dear Fons,
Please accept an apology from me regarding my slant on your integrity.
When you explained the difference between your wording, of designing
a filter for AMS, not designing the filter of AMS, I realised my mistake in
what was quite a defamatory and insulting email to you. Even considering
the possible ambiguity of your statement, my response was disrespectful,
in error, and I apologise for both.
I will post this to also to the list, even though it was not where I proposed
we held the discussion. At least that way at least that way my accusation
and acknowledgement of fault both appear here which seems reasonable.
Kindest Regards, nick.
From: compose59(a)gmail.com
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:00:28 +0300
To: fons(a)kokkinizita.net
CC: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAD] For your information
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 3:23 AM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft.
https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 01:02:27AM +0100, torbenh
wrote:
Reading this old stuff again, it seems the
plugins use
Fs/16 as the effective control rate - I had completely
forgotten about that :-)
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Aah, the immortality of good ideas.
:)
--
www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
development-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev 
8:05 p.m.
Hi All
This is why Open source/linux will march forward and become the defacto way
software will be written and eventually used. Well done to you both.
All the Best
Bob
On 21 February 2010 21:36, Nick Copeland <nickycopeland(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Fons,
Please accept an apology from me regarding my slant on your integrity.
When you explained the difference between your wording, of designing
a filter for AMS, not designing the filter of AMS, I realised my mistake in
what was quite a defamatory and insulting email to you. Even considering
the possible ambiguity of your statement, my response was disrespectful,
in error, and I apologise for both.
I will post this to also to the list, even though it was not where I
proposed
we held the discussion. At least that way at least that way my accusation
and acknowledgement of fault both appear here which seems reasonable.
Kindest Regards, nick.
From: compose59(a)gmail.com
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:00:28 +0300
To: fons(a)kokkinizita.net
CC: linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
Subject: Re: [LAD] For your information
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 3:23 AM, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
------------------------------
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. Get it
now.<https://signup.live.com/signup.aspx?id=60969>
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 01:02:27AM +0100, torbenh
wrote:
Reading this old stuff again, it seems the
plugins use
Fs/16 as the effective control rate - I had completely
forgotten about that :-)
Ciao,
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Aah, the immortality of good ideas.
:)
--
www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
development-subscribe(a)openoctave.org
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
20 Feb
20 Feb
7:39 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 11:22:38PM +0100, fons(a)kokkinizita.net wrote:
To all, for your information.
I have received the following message from Mr. Nick Copeland.
It was sent privately, but since this is the continuation of
a thread on this list and the person concerned has well gone
beyond any reasonable limits of decent behaviour I feel free
to post it here.
lol...
how did you earn that ?
by saying that bristol sucks ?
anyways. since the mail fons wrote is missing, i cant say whos mistake
it was.
nick seem to be referring to this:
http://alsamodular.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/alsamodular/ams/m_vcf.cpp?hid…
however if m_vcf.c was any good the example patches wouldnt be using
fonss ladspas.
and i remember mathias nagorni showing me totally enthuasistically
the MCP filters.
*** Start included message ***
The last time I looked at the AMS source code I was under the impression
that the Moog VCF filters were not actually yours, they were Tossavainen
and Kellets. They were published eventually placed on musicdsp.org however
there are a couple of things here:
1. In their original publishing they did not advocate the use of
quantisation of their parameters - you implemented this as an
adaptation of their algorithm.
2. In not quoting the original authors you are plagiarism them.
In the source to AMS they are quoted however it is bit disingenious
to imply that this was 'your' MoogVCF.
In short you did not actually write the 'Moog' VCF parts and
suggesting that this is how their algorithms worked is just
attempting to justify quantisation to 1/16 is not deleterious
to quality which is definitely not attributable to the original
authors.
--
torben Hohn
>From what you are saying I would like to just
say you are an
arrogant selfpublicist however base on the claims in your email
you are actually a lying plagiarst.
Regards nick.
*** End included message ***
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
7:43 p.m.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 12:40:09AM +0100, torbenh wrote:
nick seem to be referring to this:
http://alsamodular.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/alsamodular/ams/m_vcf.cpp?hid…
His comments are apparently based on the 'THANKS' file
in the AMS distribution. The first paragraph mentions
the original AMS VCF, but that is not the one I wrote
or claim to have written.
--
FA
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
E guerra e morte !
5731
days inactive
5732
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
10 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
alex stone -
fons＠kokkinizita.net -
Frank Smith -
Nick Copeland -
torbenh