palimpsests
this has not prevented it from being a versatile instrument that is quite capable of being played “enough” in tune with ensembles of other instruments, such that the vast majority of people hear zero problems.
how is what we hear in music less relevant than whether or not a given instrument is not perfectly in tune, mathematically speaking, if that variation in tuning is imperceptible to human hearing?
there are 100 cents between each 1/2 step in 12-tone equal temperament.
it is an awesome progression but violates absolutely nothing in music theory.
we can find examples of similar progressions across jazz and classical music, most of which was composed by folks who have mastered western tonal harmony.
the most important element here is how it sounds to our ears. not how closely it tracks to an equation.
i haven’t met many working musicians who had much difficulty learning the relationships between different keys, how they connect to the circle of fifths (fourths), and key signatures.
i get that it can seem overwhelming and non-intuitive, but it’s really not that complicated once you spend time playing and practicing music that illuminates these relationships (like playing ii-V-I progressions in every key, going around the circle of fifths). very little memorization involved; moreso muscle memory and an accumulation of applied theory in context.
most of the musicians i know are jazz players, where being able to play in any key is a critical aspect of mastering the genre. all the classical musicians i know are professional orchestral musicians, and they don’t seem to have any difficulty either.
the higher you go in frequency, the physical distance between each interval on the fretboard becomes smaller. so if a +/- 5 cent adjustment is 0.5 mm at the first “fret” after the nut, it will be something like be 0.1 mm when you are at the 7th “fret” location (i.e where the interval of perfect fifth, relative to the open string, is played).
* what an incredible show!
this is why a guitar using equal temperment can play consistently in-tune with itself as well as with other instruments tuned in the same system. it’s not about perfection according to some abstract mathematical model.
one of those methods is called a “chorus” effect. this is extremely common across effect platforms and is not limited to synthesizers / keyboard-type instruments.
usually that’s not the case though. typically it’s individual notes. much harder to precisely and accurately modulate tape velocity (especially by hand).
> In my opinion, the top Indian movies are usually better than the best Western movies.
modern mastering does take into account a highly popular listening environment, to ensure that the mix sounds good there as well.
the second article you posted is talking about using a car as one of several environments in which to test a mix. because it’s a “known” reference in a real-world environment (your ears are used to listening to mastered music on a car stereo).
what is bassy reverb?
folks are getting taught that the source of their problems is their “ego”, ignoring that we need a functioning ego to survive. it’s not something to be demonized or eliminated. rather, an opportunity to integrate that part of ourselves and our relationship to it, including any stories that we may be telling ourselves about the inherent pathology of ego.
please note i am using the term “ego” in a psychoanalytic sense, not in the pop-connotative sense of displays of narcissistic arrogance.
or it can feel quite curious, new, refreshing, even liberating.
or anything else along that spectrum.
what are you eating the day beforehand / how is your diet in general? (like, lots of greasy, heavy food the day before / day of, or more on the lighter, healthier side of things?) this can really impact a body’s response to mushrooms on a gastrointestinal level.
those being more fundamental, I would say - but on top of that, could consider a hot-water infusion with anti-emetic herbs like ginger. tends to be smoother on the GI (provided you haven’t filled your stomach contents as way as well). tends to come on more quickly as well.
something else to consider is that gastrointestinal distress with psilocybin can be an indication of unprocessed emotional material and / or trauma. there’s different ways to work with that, in that context.
When unbending, the cyclists’ stance on this kind of thing feels very misattuned to physics and social awareness.
Doesn’t it create more carbon emissions to cause cars to be on the road for twice as long, running at less-efficient speeds?
Especially when a cyclist blocking a half-dozen or more cars could pull over for 30 seconds to let them pass.
And sure, equal rights to the road, I can get behind. If a thoroughfare is intended for different types of vehicles with average speeds that can differ by an order of magnitude, it feels aware and attuned to me that the operators of these vehicles respectively know when to relax a tight-fisted grip on “rules no matter what”, and adjust according to the situation.
I do not see the employer-employee relationship as a one-way street and would refuse to work at a company with this kind of orientation. It has never been a problem to find organizations with a different orientation.
There exists no axiom that says an employee is obligated to work at a company. For workers at a sufficient level of skill, resources, and privileges, the working relationship at a core level is centralized on the needs for both entities; there is a mutuality in regards to getting needs met.
Of course there are organizations that basically exploit and abuse their employees; many of us have the privilege and experience to be discerning such that we can completely avoid companies like that. For lesser-paying jobs, a worker's needs are still completely valid and almost always taken into consideration by both parties.
For instance, we usually require a paycheck, and we often have well-defined, quantitative needs around this. I am not going to work somewhere that pays me $0.15 per hour, to use an extreme edge case.
Some other common employee needs:
* to work somewhere with a good work-life balance.
* challenging and non-tedious work
* to be around people who aren't sociopaths.
* to work at an organization that isn't paralyzed by micro-managing pseudoprocesses.
* to work at place that doesn't require the installation of spyware or middle-managementware on our devices.
The list goes on.
How about you? Do you not have any needs in regards to where and how you are employed?
For me, "demeaning" does not have an emotional component in that I don't take this personally and that I don't feel much of an emotional "charge" around this... definitely nothing that is "directed" towards an organization like this.
And I made no claims about what tasks are "too lowly" for me to do, that's an orthogonal issue to the question at hand. I'll happily do simple, repetitive, potentially grueling tasks if necessary.
I'm thinking about our limited time and how this industry seems to have a unique approach to hiring. It's very challenging to apply to multiple jobs that all come with some form of code challenge and lengthy interviews, while also working full-time and taking care of a family. How do we increase the signal about where we are thinking of working?
Other folks in this thread have offered some great suggestions to this question that don't necessarily involve signing an NDA.
These are wonderful suggestions!
And agree with you, to a point, that an engineer "should" be able to work with any task or codebase. We aren't primary care doctors in a community clinic who are obligated to treat every person who comes through the door.
I know myself pretty well. I know the kinds of environments in which I am most productive. I know the kinds of environments that I find to be a tedious and mentally exhausting slog. I prefer to avoid those. Some codebases are just awful to touch. I think it's OK to have some boundaries around that.