> Current literature does not distinguish between head voice and falsetto.
Hmm, are you sure about this? I thought chest voice and head voice were understood to be a single register called the modal register. And falsetto was fundamentally different.
Yes, though again, the language around registration gets really messy. Here's a great article (with a great title!) from the Journal of Singing by Christian T. Herbst "Registers—The Snake Pit of Voice Pedagogy": https://www.nats.org/_Library/JOS_On_Point/JOS-077-02-2020-1...
One relevant excerpt before the article goes into several pages discussing M11 vs M2:
> These four laryngeal mechanisms are typically termed as: vocal fry (M0, pulse
register); chest voice (M1, modal register); falsetto (M2, head voice?); and whistle register (M3).
Another article by Dr. Ingo Titze (an icon in the field of voice science and basically the father of SOVTs) about the debated "mix" register, starts this way:
> One is called chest voice, full voice, or modal voice, which is described by
a vibratory mechanism that some have labeled M1. Acoustically, harmonic energy above the fundamental dominates the sound spectrum in this register. The other anchor is called falsetto or light head voice, which is described by a
vibratory mechanism labeled M2.
It is indeed part of the standard. It says "Within a structure object, the non-bit-field members and the units in which bit-fields reside have
addresses that increase in the order in which they are declared"[1] which doesn't allow implementations to reorder fields, at least according to my understanding.
Complex for humans: I can learn a new programming language in an afternoon and be reasonably productive in it within a week or two. I wish I could say the same for natural languages.
Complex for computers: We’ve had good compilers since the 50s. Satisfactory language models are less than five years old.
Sure. I cannot imagine anyone living without the most common aliases anymore, but in a script you either need to alias again, or expand. Happens so often to me also.
I celebrated my 25th year on stage almost three years ago. Mostly playing covers in bars.
There was a time when we were hoping to “make it” and we did release an album but it wasn’t very successful, of course. That band broke up a few years later but I kept going with different bands.
I can’t do it every week anymore, let alone every night. It’s very physically demanding, so once a month is plenty in my age.
But it’s still fun. A lot of fun. I can’t imagine ever stopping it until I can’t physically do it. It’s part of who I am. Long live rock’n roll \m/
I've watched the SSA-related parts of these lectures and, despite the low video quality, I've found the quality of the content to be very high. Lecture notes can be found here: https://nptel.ac.in/courses/106108052
These instructions were not intentionally designed and put in there in secret. They're simply an unintended consequence of the "don't care" states of the instruction decoding logic.
The decoder is the part of the CPU that maps instruction opcodes to a set of control signals. For example "LDA absolute" (opcode 0xA5) would activate the "put the result in A" signal on its last cycle while "LDX absolute" (opcode 0xA6) would activate the "put the result in X" signal. The undocumented "LAX absolute" (opcode 0xA7) simply activates both because of the decoder logic's internal wiring, causing the result to be put in both registers. For other undocumented opcodes, the "do both of these things" logic is less recognizable but it's always there. Specifically disallowing these illegal states (to make them NOPs or raise an exception, for instance) would require more die space and push the price up.
See here[1] for example to get a sense of how opcode bits form certain patterns when arranged in a specific way.
Hmm, are you sure about this? I thought chest voice and head voice were understood to be a single register called the modal register. And falsetto was fundamentally different.
reply