China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Automation
Published in Keith Robinson, Ableton Live 9, 2014
Part of taking control of your Live Set includes automating various controls and parameters such as volume, pan, sends, device parameters, and song tempo. The purpose of automation is to provide hands-free control over the mixer, devices, effects, and global controls for programming musical effects and mixing. Automation control is different than Remote control in that automation is the process of moving and changing control parameters over time automatically without a physical human command. These movements are created manually or recorded into your song as a non-destructive element. The same consistent movements are made every time you playback the song. That being said, automation is often created via Remote Control. This gives you the power to not only Remote Control a device in a real-time performance, but also use Remote Control to record automation. Think of it like this: Automation is executed automatically by Live based on what you have programmed it to do. Remote Control is the process of physically controlling parameters with something other than the mouse.
IMP Systems
Published in Brecht De Man, Ryan Stables, Joshua D. Reiss, IntelligentMusic Production, 2019
Brecht De Man, Ryan Stables, Joshua D. Reiss
Panning (from ‘panorama’), or the act of varying the gain between different channels, is an important but very simple mixing process. In a stereo setting, the pan position of a source is determined by a single parameter only, i.e., the relative balance between the left and right channel. Panning brings width to a recording, and makes sources more audible by spatially separating them.
Numerical simulation of microfluidic mixing by ultrasonic-induced acoustic streaming
Published in Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 2021
Pengfei Geng, Chunxi Li, Xiangyong Ji, Shuai Dong
In the Rayleigh-like streaming flow model, the fluids concentration distributions in the microchannel at different inlet velocities are shown in Figure 10. When the inlet velocity is large, the fluids are not mixed at the center x=－l/2, but there is slight mixing around x = 0, as shown in Figure 10a–10c. It is because that the acoustic streaming velocity is largest on the x = 0 cross section, and it gradually decreases along the x-axis in the microchannel. The influence of acoustic streaming vortices on fluid mixing is weaker than the Poiseuille flow, thus the mixing performance is bad. With the decline of the inlet velocity, the intensity of the acoustic streaming vortices in the microchannel increases slightly and a significant mixing is produced by the eight vortices at y–z cross section, as shown in Figure 10d–10f. The mixing efficiency is also greatly improved, which is from 28.83% at s = 0.5 to 88.85% at s = 0.05. The mixing performance at different velocities is just like that in transducer-plane streaming model.
Hydrodynamic studies in sectionalised external loop air lift reactors
Published in Indian Chemical Engineer, 2021
Shivanand M. Teli, Channamallikarjun Mathpati
Schematic of the laboratory scale EL-ALR, made of acrylic transparent material, is shown in Figure 1. The riser and downcomer diameter are of 0.094 and 0.039 m, respectively and the reactor height is 1.510 m. The reactor has a perforated plate gas sparger with 17 circular holes with 0.003 m diameter. Water was used as a working fluid and air as a dispersed phase. All the experiments have been carried out at room temperature. The experiments have been carried out in a semi-batch mode i.e. initially air was supplied to the reactor continuously and water was already filled in the reactor. The gas hold-up and mixing time were measured by a pressure transducer and conductivity probes connected at the bottom and top of the riser section. Table S1 provides the details of experiments conducted. The physicochemical properties of the system (with electrolytes and surfactants) are provided in Table S2.