my stench is good 
and everyone else's is bad, whats with that 
ｷﾀ━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━!!
Recently, I had the idea for a small personal project where I intend to create a franchise of chans! My main idea is to create chans with themes and boards dedicated to sub-niches... like an IB dedicated only to music, another dedicated only to games, another dedicated only to anime, nother dedicated only to tech, another dedicated only to NEETs, another dedicated only to hikikomori, another dedicated only to books, and so on! This idea arose mainly from my dissatisfaction with current social networks and my desire for specific spaces where people can find niche communities, far from the degeneration of current social networks. However, I wanted to present this idea to you before anything else to see if you support it.
OP here! I definitely don't know anything about web development! Instead of creating multiple subdomains or one website, I'm going to create multiple applications! I'm basically going to create a 3D-style textboard inspired by those Star Wars CD-based opening pages! Unfortunately, front-end development has never been my strong suit, I apologize for that HAHAHAHAHAH! 
>>12528 I was thinking the same thing while reading this thread.
>>12528 This isn't LARP because it's taking place online. It's just RP.
How was your day?
Why do you care, I'm just going to slit my wrists and die tonight
BAWBAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWW 
>runs in the bathroom crying
YOUKAI DETECTED!! EXTERMINATE!!
So I've been working on a project to re-implement the VOCALOID1 engine. I'm basing it on the description in Jordi Bonada's PhD thesis "Voice Processing and Synthesis by Performance Sampling and Spectral Models" and not the original papers as the former is more detailed, easier to follow, and also describes the VOCALOID2 engine. After a lot of trouble with getting TWM f0 estimation to work, I've finally gotten to implementing MFPA. And amazingly, it seems to have worked first try. Compare my results: https://i.ibb.co/dsvgv0fd/Screen-Shot-2026-03-02-at-3-54-48-PM.png To the results in the study: https://i.ibb.co/C3fjdWVd/Screen-Shot-2026-03-02-at-3-55-09-PM.png
Bump for visibility, merged with original thread.
I feel like I've been going insane over the last day. I've scoured every paper mention Excitation plus Resonance, but at least as far as I can tell, none of them actually mentioned the procedure for actually estimating the parameters of the EpR resonances. Even the expired patent for EpR doesn't seem to mention it. After thinking about it for a while, I attempted to come up with something. No idea if it will actually work though. The procedure I came up with is as follows: a) An amplitude spectrum representing N discrete sampled amplitudes of sinusoids in a frame or voice pulse is calculated such that for every index i in [0, N), Amp[i] is estimation of the value of the amplitude of a sinusoid having frequency i*F at a time or over a time period, where F is a constant frequency step. In the case of WBVPM, F is the fundamental frequency. b) A logarithmic amplitude spectrum comprising an array of N elements is created such that LogAmp[i] = log(Amp[i]) for i in [0, N), where N is the number of discrete values in the amplitude spectrum and Amp is the amplitude spectrum. c) A cubic natural spline LogInt comprising N - 1 segments is created from the values of the logarithmic amplitude spectrum and positions represent the frequency values of the sinusoids estimated in the amplitude spectrum. d) An array capable of holding up to 2N-2 objects representing the resonance parameters (frequency, amplitude, and bandwidth) is created and it's initial length is set to zero. e) For each segment S of the spline LogInt having index i and parameters offset o; span h; and coefficients a, b, c, and d (representing the cubic, quadratic, linear, and constant values, respectively); the following is performed: e) 1) The derivative of S is computed. e) 2) The roots of said derivative is computed, and for each of them, the following steps are performed: e) 2) a) It is checked whether the root, when the offset o and span h is accounted for, lies in the range [o, o+h] of segment S. If it does not, it is discarded and the further computation is skipped. e) 2) b) The value of the second derivative of the segment S is computed at the root. If it is not negative, the root is discarded and the further computation is skipped. e) 2) c) Then a resonance parameters object is appended to the end of the resonance parameters array, and that array's length is increased by one. The frequency value is set to the root. The amplitude value is set to the difference of the interpolated logarithmic amplitude spline value at the root and the value of the source curve at the root. The bandwidth value is set to the reciprocal of the negation of the second derivative of the segment at the root. f) An iterative refinement process of the resonances is performed for M iterations. For each iteration, the following is performed: f) 1) For each resonance O with index i in the resonance array, the following is performed: f) 1) a) A sum s is set to 0. f) 1) b) Then, for each resonance O2 (including resonance O) with index j in the resonance array, the sum is increased by the value of the resonance O2 at the frequency of the resonance O. f) 1) c) The difference between the sum s and the interpolated value of the logarithmic amplitude spline LogInt at the frequency of O is computed. It is multiplied by a fixed step size S and then the amplitude of O is subtracted by this value.
About three weeks ago, I promised that the following day, I would make a post the following day about a big update. I didn't say what it was about at the time, but it was going to be about the Excitation plus Resonance model. Unfortunately, I was not able to make the post at the time, and am sorry for that. However, I do have a significant update now. Back in April, I began to implement the Excitation plus Resonance model. The Excitation plus Resonance is model of the voice timbre spectrum. It consists of several parts actually, but the two main ones in terms of implementation difficult are the source curve and vocal tract resonances. The source curves approximates the frequency-domain response of the voice source, and the resonances correspond roughly to formants and are model using a modified version of the Klatt Formant. The problem lies not in implementing this model - it is actually very easy to do so - but rather estimating the parameters for this model, which is not given in any of the papers I've read. Back in April, I spent a couple days trying to create it. Ultimately, I came up with something that was quite poor quality, very slow, and required very specific parameters but accepted it. Much later though, I found that the exact method to estimate the source curve is actually given in the expired EpR patent. Not wanting to repeat my previous mistake, when I began to work on EpR, I searched extensively for the method used to estimate the resonances, but came up with nothing. Eventually, I began to trying figure it out myself. I started by recreating the data in the paper by annotating an image extracted from the paper in Photoshop and then running a python script on said annotated images. I would then compared the result of my approach on said recreated data to the paper's. I actually had been thinking about it long before my first attempt. I already had a method that I had conceived of. The main idea of this method was that the reciprocal of the second derivative could be used to approximate the bandwidths of the resonances. Initially, after having to make a few adaptions to the approach after realizing several things wouldn't work quite how I thought, the results vastly outperformed my initial expectations. There were several ideas that didn't work out, but overall I felt good at the end of the first day. I debated whether to continue trying or to just go with what I had. I decided that would go with what I had and make a post about it the following day, this about three weeks however. The next day however I decided to continue work instead. Initially, I was quite surprised that the second derivative reciprocal method even worked at all, so I overlooked many inadequacies. They were a lot larger than I had thought for some reason the previous. Specifically, in many of the most critical areas. It is worth noting that it is in a logarithmic scale (decibels), so apparently small errors in some areas can actually be very large. Furthermore, I discovered there was actually a mistake in the modified Klatt implementation, and that with the correct formulation, it performed much worse. Furthermore, the next day, I decided to recreate another sample from the paper, and it performed terribly. So I continued. I decided this time, I would not be satisfied until I had actually recreated it properly, no matter how long it took. Continued...
Three weeks later and 1,905 attempts later... Initially, I made quite some progress, however for over a week, I made basically no progress at all despite many hundreds of attempts. Finally, though, mainly in the past two to three days, I have made some major discoveries. Yesterday, I did a test that showed that combining an old idea I had ruled out with a new one showed significant progress. Just today, I have implemented that idea properly and made another significant improvement. While this new implementation is still flawed, and actually has major issues for the higher frequencies, I think it shows considerable potential. Besides, it is more simplified than the previous implementation and I have some clear ways forward. This new version solves many issues I had before and doesn't require many of contrived things I had to do before. One thing specifically it shows promise is in this section of the second recreated test sample. Here is that section from the paper: https://files.catbox.moe/ontyhu.png Here is the result from the old approach: https://files.catbox.moe/9uplbn.png And now here is the result from the new approach: https://files.catbox.moe/gzu3q8.png
roody-poos wouldn’t get it.
PLEASE LET ME POST FEMBOYS AND TWINKS! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEEEEEEEEEEASE!!!
the only twink I know
>>12417
You shall be PUNISHED for your lewdness. 
GAY BUTTSEX IS TRUTAKU CULTURE~!!!!! ORA!!! TAKE THIS MODERATORS~~!!!!!!!
i need to pee anyone got a free mouth
Hello, I have an update to my vocal synthesis project. I have chosen from now on to post links to my wordpress blog instead of trying to post all of it natively. This is to improve the quality of formatting (particularly section headings and math), not have to split it across many posts, and allow for multiple inline images without having to upload to sites like catbox.moe or imgbb. I hope your understand. https://queuesevenm.wordpress.com/2026/05/14/wide-band-subharmonic-modeling/
What's your BMI Hikarin? Mine is 17.7 https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm >Underweight = <18.5 >Normal weight = 18.5–24.9 >Overweight = 25–29.9 >Obesity = BMI of 30 or greater
>>12442 thirtyfuckingsix, i am muscular under the fat so it doesnt look as bad, but i am still fucking fat under the shirt it'd be nice to get leaner, and i happen to have to get leaner because i'd like to compete at a high level in a combat sport i have been practicing for a long time, yk it has weight classes. Thing is I live with my family so its hard to stay in a deficit when you are eating together, there are also relatives living nearby so about twice a month its "lets go out and eat a pizza", if I fucked off somewhere far away i'd probably pass entire days without eating
>>12483 I'm pissed that someone has a higher BMI than me on here, I'm going on a turbo weight-gain buffet diet to one up you.
>>12442
17.3, I want so much to gain weight but even when I eat a lot I gain almost nothing
