search results matching tag: cymbal

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (34)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (4)     Comments (60)   

Neil Peart Drum Solo,R.I.P

AeroMechanical says...

I may be missing what you're seeing, but it looks legit to me. The cymbals and some of the pads on that side are electronic too. They can also be configured to play different samples on successive hits (or velocities) to further muddle things.

Thing that struck my attention was a couple times he switched from matched to traditional grip and back.

newtboy said:

But you can hear the sounds I mean be triggered starting at about 5:00 as he hits the midi-zylophone thing, then the sound is triggered again at 5:08 when he clearly didn't play them and a few times after that. Perhaps what I'm hearing isn't supposed to be percussion and is just the backup music synching with the percussion....but there are definitely kettle drum and other percussion sounds happening when he isn't hitting any drum.

AUTOMATICA 4k - Robots Vs. Music - Nigel Stanford

hamsteralliance says...

CGI rendered tests to further fool you into thinking it's not all CG. It's been done before.

This seems like a job for Captain Disillusion!

EDIT: Perhaps I should clarify a bit. By CGI I don't just mean it's all 3D renders. I mean more that it's all computer trickery of some sort. Some 3D, some compositing, lots of time manipulation. Just look at how often he's clearly green screened in. Look at how the cymbals move. A robotic arm can punch through a piano? There's a lot of CG going on here. And if it's in the crazier shots, I don't see why it wouldn't be in the simpler shots.

eric3579 said:

I don't think all of it is. These tests seem like they wouldn't have been done if the whole video is cgi.
https://youtu.be/mAdLcUEzu-Q
https://youtu.be/qPT0TNj-YRk
https://youtu.be/tNu6PT7KKQg

Why Is Salt So Bad for You, Anyway?

transmorpher says...

Here's the study he's talking about in the video: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311889?query=featured_home&#Results=&t=articleBackground

It looks like a legitimate study, but being correlational it should be taken with a grain of salt *snare drum, splash cymbal* As corrolation cannot show causation.

They seem to control for various factors like age, cholesterol level and previous hypertension too, so they don't appear to be fudging any results.

Perhaps I could argue they aren't measuring salt intake, but rather sodium excretion, and estimating intake based on urine samples. So there is potentially a huge difference in diet - a lot of the participants were from Asia, where they don't tend to use table salt (they use soy sauce instead) And even though it's still high in sodium, soy sauce could be going through a different process inside the body. (Similar to how sugar doesn't cause an insulin spike when it's in fruit form, but does when it's refined form). It's possible that the salt from soy could be passing through the body rather than settling in the blood stream. I'm just speculating. Or perhaps they are also eating other foods which are protective against moderate salt intake, allowing more of it to be excreted than absorbed.

Either way it's very interesting to me :-)

What I would like to see is a study on foods, rather than ingredients to get a better picture. Because humans don't usually eat individual minerals, and combinations of minerals seem to act differently in the body.


I guess what it's all saying though is if you are healthy, then 3-6g of salt is fine, but once you are at risk of CVD you need to back off in order to reverse the damage. But CVD is of course not the only disease people need to be careful about (although it is the #1 we should be worrying about), but salt also feeds various cancers etc.

jimnms said:

Healcare Triage disagrees:
1) Dietary Salt Recommendations Don't Line Up with Recent Evidence.
2) HCT News #1: Eat More Salt

Japanese Girl Is A Better Drummer Than You

Trancecoach (Member Profile)

Trancecoach says...

It's officially known as a report on the "Measurement of the Duration of a Trendless Subsample in a Global Climate Time Series." In lay-speak, it's a study of just how long the current pause in global warming has lasted. And the results are profound:

According to Canadian Ross McKitrick, a professor of environmental economics who wrote the paper for the Open Journal of Statistics, "I make the duration out to be 19 years at the surface and 16 to 26 years in the lower troposphere depending on the data set used."

In still plainer English, McKitrick has crunched the numbers from all the major weather organizations in the world and has found that there has been no overall warming at the Earth's surface since 1995 - that's 19 years in all.

During the past two decades, there have been hotter years and colder years, but on the whole the world's temperatures have not been rising. Despite a 13 per cent rise in carbon dioxide levels over the period, the average global temperature is the same today as it was almost 20 years ago.

In the lower atmosphere, there has been no warming for somewhere between 16 and 26 years, depending on which weather organization's records are used.

Not a single one of the world's major meteorological organizations - including the ones the United Nations relies on for its hysterical, the-skies-are-on-fire predictions of environmental apocalypse - shows atmospheric warming for at least the last 16 years. And some show no warming for the past quarter century.

This might be less significant if some of the major temperature records showed warming and some did not. But they all show no warming.

Even the records maintained by devoted eco-alarmists, such as the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre, show no appreciable warming since the mid-1990s.

Despite continued cymbal-crashing propaganda from environmentalists and politicians who insist humankind is approaching a critical climate-change tipping point, there is no real evidence this is true.

There are no more hurricanes than usual, no more typhoons or tornadoes, floods or droughts. What there is, is more media coverage more often.

Forty years ago when a tropical storm wiped out villages on a South Pacific Island there might have been pictures in the newspaper days or weeks later, then nothing more. Now there is live television coverage hours after the fact and for weeks afterwards.

That creates the impression storms are worse than they used to be, even though statistically they are not.

While the UN's official climate-scare mouthpiece, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has acknowledged the lack of warming over the past two decades, it has done so very quietly. What's more, it has not permitted the facts to get in the way of its continued insistence that the world is going to hell in a hand basket soon unless modern economies are crippled and more decision-making power is turned over to the UN and to national bureaucrats and environmental activists.

Later this month in New York, the UN will hold a climate summit including many of the world's leaders. So frantic are UN bureaucrats to keep the climate scare alive they have begun a worldwide search for what they themselves call a climate-change "Malala."

That's a reference to Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani schoolgirl who was shot in the head by the Taliban after demanding an education. Her wounding sparked a renewed, worldwide concern for women's rights.

The new climate spokeswoman must be a female under 30, come from a poor country and have been the victim of a natural disaster.

If the facts surrounding climate-disaster predictions weren't falling apart, the UN wouldn't such need a sympathetic new face of fear.

RedSky said:

snipped

The Who - 'My Generation'

Zawash says...

The explosion at 2:29 was quite something - here's from Wikipedia:

The performance by The Who in 1967 was another defining moment in the series; as the group often did during that period, The Who destroyed their instruments at the conclusion of their performance of "My Generation", with the usual addition of mild explosives for light pyrotechnic effect. The piece would end with guitarist Pete Townshend grabbing Tommy's guitar and smashing it. On the Smothers Brothers show that night, a small amount of explosive was put into the small cannon that Keith Moon kept in his bass drum. But it didn't go off during the rehearsal. Unbeknownst to Moon, a stage hand had added another explosive before the taping, and later Moon added another charge so that now there were three explosive charges in the cannon instead of one.[9] When Moon detonated it, the explosion was so intense that a piece of cymbal shrapnel cut into Moon's arm; Moon is heard moaning in pain toward the end of the piece. Townshend, who had been in front of Moon's drums at the time, had his hair singed by the blast; he is seen putting out sparks in his hair before finishing the sketch with a visibly shocked Tommy Smothers. Allegedly, the blast contributed heavily to Townshend's long-term hearing loss.

maatc (Member Profile)

maatc (Member Profile)

Kid not sure how to handle broken cymbals during anthem

chingalera says...

See now, in a few years, if that kid goes on to join the jazz ensemble, he'll learn to improvise more effectively-I'd have picked up a mallet and used the one cymbal I had left to finish it out

Everything You Need To Know About Digital Audio Signals

Stanley Kubricks One-Point-Perspective Shots Montage

entr0py says...

>> ^direpickle:

>> ^CrushBug:
What's the music in this? I used to remember the name.

"Lux Aeterna," from the soundtrack for Requiem for a Dream, by Clint Mansell.


Seems like overkill that someone had to add a choir and cymbals. Wasn't it epic enough to begin with? Still, nice montage.

How Cymbals are Made

How Zildjian cymbals are made

How Zildjian cymbals are made

How Zildjian cymbals are made



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists