Audiobus: Use your music apps together.

What is Audiobus?Audiobus is an award-winning music app for iPhone and iPad which lets you use your other music apps together. Chain effects on your favourite synth, run the output of apps or Audio Units into an app like GarageBand or Loopy, or select a different audio interface output for each app. Route MIDI between apps — drive a synth from a MIDI sequencer, or add an arpeggiator to your MIDI keyboard — or sync with your external MIDI gear. And control your entire setup from a MIDI controller.

Download on the App Store

Audiobus is the app that makes the rest of your setup better.

OT: This is a matter of math...

124

Comments

  • edited May 2019

    Definitions of the metre since 1798[66]
    Basis of definition Date Absolute
    uncertainty Relative
    uncertainty
    ​1⁄10,000,000 part of one half of a meridian, measurement by Delambre and Méchain 1798 0.5–0.1 mm 10−4
    First prototype Mètre des Archives platinum bar standard 1799 0.05–0.01 mm 10−5
    Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice (1st CGPM) 1889 0.2–0.1 μm 10−7
    Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice, atmospheric pressure, supported by two rollers (7th CGPM) 1927 n.a. n.a.
    1,650,763.73 wavelengths of light from a specified transition in krypton-86 (11th CGPM) 1960 0.01–0.005 μm 10−8
    Length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in ​1⁄299,792,458 of a second (17th CGPM) 1983 0.1 nm

    Source

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metre

    Just because you’re still using ‘prototype meters’ :wink:

  • edited May 2019

    @BiancaNeve said:
    Definitions of the metre since 1798[66]
    Basis of definition Date Absolute
    uncertainty Relative
    uncertainty
    ​1⁄10,000,000 part of one half of a meridian, measurement by Delambre and Méchain 1798 0.5–0.1 mm 10−4
    First prototype Mètre des Archives platinum bar standard 1799 0.05–0.01 mm 10−5
    Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice (1st CGPM) 1889 0.2–0.1 μm 10−7
    Platinum-iridium bar at melting point of ice, atmospheric pressure, supported by two rollers (7th CGPM) 1927 n.a. n.a.
    1,650,763.73 wavelengths of light from a specified transition in krypton-86 (11th CGPM) 1960 0.01–0.005 μm 10−8
    Length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in ​1⁄299,792,458 of a second (17th CGPM) 1983 0.1 nm

    Source

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_metre

    Just because you’re still using ‘prototype meters’ :wink:

    cough do you realize how small these differences are?
    let me sum it up
    it basically didnt change at all things were adjusted a little to keep up with tec of the time
    Platinum-iridium and krypton wasn't exactly available 1700 something ;)

  • edited May 2019

    These may be small differences. But as a matter of fact they are different. And your assertion that it had never been changed and that my education was faulty were both incorrect.

    The metric system is entirely based on the time that elapses during 9,192,631,770 (9.192631770 x 10 9 ) cycles of the radiation produced by the transition between two levels of the cesium 133 atom.

    And if you think that is logical ....

  • edited May 2019

    🙄
    its a standard everybody agreed upon to get rid of all the old junk
    makes complete logical sense

  • edited May 2019

    @Max23 said:
    🙄

    the point is there are only 3 countries in the world that totally refuse the metric system
    Liberia, Myanmar & at the end of the list another 3. world country >:) the USA

    UK, canda & Philippines
    use metric & the old junk 🙄

    ;)

    the whole world is connected now
    we all should agree on English & the metric system to avoid unnecessary confusion. Don't you think so, too?

  • China also uses new and old junk.

  • This was the way it was taught when I went to school also, what was in the parentheses was done first so it’d be ⭕️() as @Max23 detailed above and without the parentheses having precedence it’d be 🚫().

    🚫 () new ⭕️ () old
    6/2(1+2) 6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2) 6/2(3)
    3+6 6/6
    9 1

    These differences are not significant provided the people or programs evaluating the expressions agree on the same set of criteria for evaluating them. It’s an issue of agreeing upon a shared convention not the measure of intelligence or who is right or wrong.

    It’s not a matter of no one can agree it’s that they insist upon a particular convention and are unwilling to agree to a different one. The mathematics is the same, people decide how they want to define the rules for describing it. Perhaps for some applications one system makes more sense, for example suppose a computer had a system where it does every operation as it comes in for maximum throughput.
    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+2
    5

    It’d be up to the humans to enter the expressions into the computer correctly so they get the results they were expecting. If they were expecting to get a 9 or a 1, they’d get blamed for the plane falling out of the sky because they entered the wrong expression into the computer.

    Reverse Polish Notation is an example of this type of system used by HP calculators way back when.

  • Meters are not all equal.
    Usually they are 4/4, but can also be 3/4, 6/8, 5/4, 7/8, etc.
    :D

  • @InfoCheck said:

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+2
    5

    oops, thats 6, but interesting

    3(1+2)

    3+3
    6

  • @Max23 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+2
    5

    oops, thats 6, but interesting

    3(1+2)

    3+3
    6

    I think he got 5 by multiplying the 3 with the 1 inside the parenthesis? I could be wrong though...

  • edited May 2019

    @DCJ said:

    @Max23 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+2
    5

    oops, thats 6, but interesting

    3(1+2)

    3+3
    6

    I think he got 5 by multiplying the 3 with the 1 inside the parenthesis? I could be wrong though...

    im not sure
    nah then it would be 9 too?
    3(1+2)
    3x1+3x2
    9

    now im really confused, lol

  • @Max23 said:

    @DCJ said:

    @Max23 said:

    @InfoCheck said:

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+2
    5

    oops, thats 6, but interesting

    3(1+2)

    3+3
    6

    I think he got 5 by multiplying the 3 with the 1 inside the parenthesis? I could be wrong though...

    im not sure
    nah then it would be 9 too?
    3(1+2)
    3x1+3x2
    9

    No he only multiplied the three and the one, then its (3+2)

    I've had no idea why if that’s the case but I don't understand anything after all I've heard so far. 😂

  • edited May 2019

    @InfoCheck

    could you please explain this to me in a way that I understand it?
    how do you get the 2???

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+ 2
    5

    @DCJ
    ah, you mean ignore the () completely?
    6/2(1+2)
    3x1+2
    5
    ?

    hm, must be this
    wow, that is really weird

  • OK, math nerds. Do the 2 answers for 6/2(1+2) based on operator precedence rules
    change in:

    Octal (Base 8 - Love those Nibbles)
    Dodecatal (Base 12)
    Hexadecimal (Base 16)

    For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).

  • @McD said:
    OK, math nerds. Do the 2 answers for 6/2(1+2) based on operator precedence rules
    change in:

    Octal (Base 8 - Love those Nibbles)
    Dodecatal (Base 12)
    Hexadecimal (Base 16)

    For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).

    My calculator just said “huh?”

  • edited May 2019

    @DCJ said:

    @McD said:
    OK, math nerds. Do the 2 answers for 6/2(1+2) based on operator precedence rules
    change in:

    Octal (Base 8 - Love those Nibbles)
    Dodecatal (Base 12)
    Hexadecimal (Base 16)

    For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).

    My calculator just said “huh?”

    hm, I dont know what any of that means but if I just make my own rules how to read 6/2(1+2) I get these possible answers
    1,5,9,6 and 2,25 and 1,2
    Im sure I forgot something lol
    lol that's weird fun 🤓
    I guess there are 2 more solution with a "," I forgot as you asked for 4 weird things
    (and the tv program bores me)

  • @Max23 said:
    @InfoCheck

    could you please explain this to me in a way that I understand it?
    how do you get the 2???

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+ 2
    5

    @DCJ
    ah, you mean ignore the () completely?
    6/2(1+2)
    3x1+2
    5
    ?

    hm, must be this
    wow, that is really weird

    Here’s an article about it https://wiki.audiob.us/rpn_to_apple

  • edited May 2019

    Just got back to this thread and man this got out of hand!

    P.S.: yes to metric everywhere / no to English everywhere
    P.S. 2: what's inside the parentheses is done first, 6/2·(1+2) (i.e. with explicit multiplication) is 9

  • edited May 2019

    @jipumarino said:
    Just got back to this thread and man this got out of hand!

    P.S.: yes to metric everywhere / no to English everywhere

    oh I meant English as 2nd language ;)

  • edited May 2019

    @InfoCheck said:

    @Max23 said:
    @InfoCheck

    could you please explain this to me in a way that I understand it?
    how do you get the 2???

    maximum throughput.

    6/2(1+2)
    3(1+2)
    3+ 2
    5

    @DCJ
    ah, you mean ignore the () completely?
    6/2(1+2)
    3x1+2
    5
    ?

    hm, must be this
    wow, that is really weird

    Here’s an article about it https://wiki.audiob.us/rpn_to_apple

    cool, I figured out how to get to 5
    neuroplasticity is very interesting
    did you see this?

  • edited May 2019

    @Max23 Yes it’s a very interesting video.

  • Here is my smart friends response:

    I say 9; the question being whether the denominator is 2, or 2(1+2). In the latter case, one makes it explicit by either placing the 6 above a long divisor line over 2(1+2), or parenthesizing it as 6/(2(1+2)). Since neither has been done, we must take it as (6/2)(1+2) = 3 * 3 = 9

  • edited May 2019

    @Crawlingwind said:
    Here is my smart friends response:

    I say 9; the question being whether the denominator is 2, or 2(1+2). In the latter case, one makes it explicit by either placing the 6 above a long divisor line over 2(1+2), or parenthesizing it as 6/(2(1+2)). Since neither has been done, we must take it as (6/2)(1+2) = 3 * 3 = 9

    nope, since neither has been done its undefined therefore both (1 & 9) are correct ;)

    as its undefined I played around with the numbers and symbols
    in the theoretical assumption that all rules of how to interpret 6/2(1+2) are undefined
    I came up with 6 possible solutions in the 5 minutes I played around with that idea (I didnt change the meaning of devided by (/) and + or the numbers themselves )
    im sure there are plenty more possible ways of how to interpret 6/2(1+2)

    dont be afraid kids,
    6/2(1+2) will never show up in this writing form in a math test, at least I hope so, because then I would be fucked
    its a joke that works very well on the internet, because its not easy to write math things with only the numbers and symbols you have on your keyboard in a way that is conclusive, it creates a lot of buzz.
    6/(2(1+2)) is conclusive ;)

  • @Max23 said:

    @Crawlingwind said:
    Here is my smart friends response:

    I say 9; the question being whether the denominator is 2, or 2(1+2). In the latter case, one makes it explicit by either placing the 6 above a long divisor line over 2(1+2), or parenthesizing it as 6/(2(1+2)). Since neither has been done, we must take it as (6/2)(1+2) = 3 * 3 = 9

    nope, since neither has been done its undefined therefore both (1 & 9) are correct ;)

    as its undefined I played around with the numbers and symbols
    in the theoretical assumption that all rules of how to interpret 6/2(1+2) are undefined
    I came up with 6 possible solutions in the 5 minutes I played around with that idea (I didnt change the meaning of devided by (/) and + or the numbers themselves )
    im sure there are plenty more possible ways of how to interpret 6/2(1+2)

    dont be afraid kids,
    6/2(1+2) will never show up in this writing form in a math test, at least I hope so, because then I would be fucked
    its a joke that works very well on the internet, because its not easy to write math things with only the numbers and symbols you have on your keyboard in a way that is conclusive, it creates a lot of buzz.
    6/(2(1+2)) is conclusive ;)

    Yes. What he said. :D

  • @McD said:
    OK, math nerds. Do the 2 answers for 6/2(1+2) based on operator precedence rules
    change in:

    Octal (Base 8 - Love those Nibbles)
    Dodecatal (Base 12)
    Hexadecimal (Base 16)

    For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).

    Maybe it requires a computer design nerd to know where to start since it's probably not considered in math courses and every teaches hex to programmer's.

    Still, a valid puzzle for anyone that gets Base Number Systems.

  • edited May 2019

    I got 1 because where I grew up the 6 % 2 was interpreted in context differently than 6/2 (the former an operation, the latter a ‘standalone’ fraction, something immediately reduce-able to 3 no matter the ooo). Whatever, all that matters to me is I learned the way the SAT/ACT wanted and got a free ride to college because of it.

  • edited May 2019

    @InfoCheck
    about the hp calculator
    how did the message thing work? Im much more interested in language than numbers 🤓
    like with any other calculator - turn the display upside down?
    like this
    7353=ESEL= (German for donkey=)Idiot ?

    or with hexadezimal?
    (ABBA - 10,11,11,10)? dual 1010,1011,1011,1010?)

    bin- hex - dez
    1010.1100.1101.1100 = ACDC = 44.252

    ?
    I can read binary, dez tells me nothing/leaves my brain blank ...

  • Lol math

  • @oat_phipps said:
    I got 1 because where I grew up the 6 % 2 was interpreted in context differently than 6/2 (the former an operation, the latter a ‘standalone’ fraction, something immediately reduce-able to 3 no matter the ooo). Whatever, all that matters to me is I learned the way the SAT/ACT wanted and got a free ride to college because of it.

    My SAT score got me a free remedial math course!

  • edited May 2019

    @McD said: For extra credit convert 6/2(1+2) to Binary (Base 2).

    (I dont know what base 2 means but I guess its this)

    0110/0010(0001+0010) = 0001 (and) 1001(because its not defined how to multiplicate) 🤓

Sign In or Register to comment.