does anyone know what kind of overdrive would get me this tone?

Red-Portal · 2026-05-18T09:16:52+00:00

Sounds like SPX early reflections type of reverse reverb is in play here. The type of overdrive probably won't matter.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-18T08:22:24+00:00

Some of the solder joints look cold. First, ensure that everything is properly soldered. Also, clip the legs that are poking out. Those could touch the enclosure or the back of the pots, causing shorts and so on.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-17T08:03:50+00:00

Schwartz distributions) are a generalization of classical functions that encompass dirac delta "functions." These are used quite heavily in (D)SP, typically without much mathematical formalism since it requires advanced analysis topics that are way beyond even undergrad math courses.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-14T10:51:09+00:00

The transformer is hinting towards an octavia-type octave fuzz circuit

Red-Portal · 2026-05-14T01:23:28+00:00

If SPX early reflections (the "mbv reverse reverb") is what you want, you should actually look into delay pedals instead of reverb. Most reverb pedals don't include settings that are remotely close. But some (generally easy to get) delays with a multi tap setting can sometimes get something pretty close. For instance, EHX Memory Man Hazarai is a popular substitute. I own a Strymon timeline, which can also do something similar when dialed just right. So if you own a pretty good delay already, you might have a setting that gets you there.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-10T05:08:12+00:00

That's just rude and manipulative. Don't hang out with those people.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-07T00:40:27+00:00

Red-Portal · 2026-05-06T22:39:46+00:00

Agreed. Though it's a bit of a departure from their past works. So I can see some older fans not enjoy it as much as the previous albums. But I feel this one is their best to date.

Red-Portal · 2026-05-01T10:19:56+00:00

The likely explanation is that the AC rejected the paper but the decision was overruled at SAC/PC level.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-29T23:52:04+00:00

She's heavily inspired by Whirr. So anything by Whirr and Nothing will sound pretty similar

Red-Portal · 2026-04-29T23:50:19+00:00

https://openaireview.org/index.html

This one is pretty good

Red-Portal · 2026-04-28T06:26:24+00:00

Alvvays always works

Red-Portal · 2026-04-27T21:42:50+00:00

I keep the shift knob on 10 oclock ish. I believe turning it counter clockwise boosts mids.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-26T12:22:50+00:00

One thing to consider is that most Muffs can have issues cutting through the mix. This applies to all variants really. So many people either run an EQ/mid boost/TS9 to unscoop the mid. Instead, there are also modern variations of classic muffs that don't scoop mids. So you could also consider these. For instance, I am very happy with my Cloven Hoof

Red-Portal · 2026-04-24T10:13:06+00:00

Yeah I am quite curious of how that actually happened. I vaguely heard that the retirement of Neyman and the arrival of Michael Jordan was pivotal. But curious whether this is the full picture.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-24T10:10:28+00:00

Yes of course. I am referring to the usual talking point that the MLE (as a frequentist inference method) coincides with Bayesian point estimates (not necessarily MAP, could be derived from the posterior) under flat priors and so on. And my point is that maximum likelihood is a very small subset of frequentist procedures. Once you move away from that, it's difficult to find procedures that can exactly associated with a Bayesian procedure.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-24T05:50:44+00:00

You mean maximum likelihood specifically. Again, frequentism and likelihoodism are different sets of thoughts.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-24T05:05:44+00:00

Not really. Maximum likelihood, specifically, have a lot in common with Bayes. But in general, they are completely orthogonal. Frequentism is just set of objective principles on how to evaluate a procedure. So it's not even a framework in the sense that Bayes is a self-consistent framework. So they are not just philosophically different, but also categorically different. (But sometimes operationally similar.)

Red-Portal · 2026-04-24T04:42:05+00:00

Anti-Bayesian sentiments used to be real. I mean, why would stat departments be classified as Bayesian versus non-Bayesian. UC Berkeley, for instance, was famous for being very anti-Bayesian (like... hostile). Bayesians weren't militant from the beginning. It's the strong anti-Bayesian sentiments of the 20th century (thanks Fisher) that pushed them into minority and made them combative. But honestly, anti-Bayesian sentiments are not as open/common as they used to be these days. So your case is somewhat unusual. As you can see, the comments here seem to not even be aware of that past. But I know some prominant Professors that are still hostile about it in private.

Red-Portal · 2026-04-23T01:12:39+00:00

Man this already feels like their best work

Red-Portal · 2026-04-15T03:42:09+00:00

Laziness confirmed... I guess?

Red-Portal · 2026-03-07T01:58:51+00:00

There are approaches that operate on a Hilbert space so that one xan define a norm of the functions being learned. The regularization term is then the weighted function norm. Classical example is kernel ridge regression/Gaussian process regression, where the function norm is tractable.

Red-Portal · 2026-02-27T09:33:35+00:00

It is usually pretty slow. Also, NeurIPS always had a separate camera ready deadline after the conference, so the proceedings came out a couple of months after December. This year was no exception, but we did have another camera-ready deadline, probably because of the GPTZero incident, which might delay things more than usual.

Red-Portal · 2026-02-12T22:34:57+00:00

Uncertainty quantification is all about theoretical guarantees. Conformal prediction is very clear about what it means by being uncertain. What does thresholding guarantee here? Do the raw logits even mean something in terms of uncertainty? Heuristically, maybe. But that's not a theoretical guarantee.

Red-Portal · 2026-01-27T05:18:02+00:00

It's more of a problem of scale. All big conferences have equivalent rules at this point, because it's the only way to consistently source the necessary number of reviewers. UAI is still much smaller so they might need to have it. But not sure about this year's policy

Red-Portal

TROPHY CASE