36c96194-1ff3-4e3c-a839-a58ecea8aa51-image.png

@SSmith1226 said in How about a "Random Meaningless Image...let's see them string"?:

You can fill in the blanks!

IMG_6611.jpeg

Just two working jets having a laugh together

The pressure is on me now. This one just off the easel and still unsold….
Gulf Coaast, Florida. My cousin lives near Tampa and takes some very nice photos that I am free to use as reference.IMG_0364.jpeg

@OldSchoolEuph thanks - always fun to hear the real stories after hearing the rumors 😉

@j-jericho

Well, I am surprised. This fellow can sing. I never thought I would ever hear those old ballads from the lips of Robert Palmer. Thanks for sharing.
George

A 2025 update on AI. I was using ChatGPT for music pedagogy. However, I had to give up on it. It's responses were generally innaccurate. It couldn't even get the fingering chart correct. So I had to ask it this question:

Question
when you quote information that is 100% incorrect, where are you citing this information? How did you come up with a fallacy in the 1st place if the false information isn't even available on the internet?

Response:
Great question — and an important one. Short answer: there are two ways a confidently wrong statement can appear, and the explanation depends on whether I actually looked things up in this chat or not.

If I DIDN’T browse the web during our chat (no live citations):

I generate answers from patterns learned during training. I don’t have access to my training examples and I can’t point to a single document.

Sometimes that pattern-matching hallucinates a fact (or combines bits of different sources) and presents it confidently. That’s a model error: noisy training data, contradictory sources, statistical averaging, or an extrapolation the model made.

I can also misinterpret your wording or the context window and produce a plausible-sounding but false claim.

If I DID browse / gave explicit web citations in this chat (you saw links or web.run citations):

Those citations point to pages I fetched during this session. If the claim is wrong, either the source itself is incorrect/outdated, or I misread / poorly summarized the source. (That happens — I can make extraction/summarization mistakes.)

There are also occasional cases where I accidentally fabricate a citation label or paraphrase that looks like a real source — that’s a hallucinated citation.

Why it happens (brief list):
compression of vast, noisy training data → no single-origin traceability
conflicting or low-quality sources in training
interpolation/extrapolation when exact facts aren’t present
parsing, arithmetic, or summarization errors
ambiguity in the prompt or missing context

What I can do now:
If you paste the exact incorrect quote (or point to the message), I’ll verify it right away and show the real sources (I’ll run a live check and give links and an explanation of where the mistake likely came from).

Or tell me whether I used citations in that reply — if so I’ll re-check those pages and explain whether the source was wrong or I misread it.

Want me to look up a specific claim now? Paste it and I’ll verify and correct it.

@stumac Phase is not what causes the frequency that we "hear". I find more evidence that the size and taper of the trumpet bell "amplify" frequencies starting in the second octave. An 1300 Hz horn is around 4.8" in diameter at the mouth according to horn theory... This would damp the fundamental which is below cutoff severely.

@j-jericho

That was great fun. I grew up watching those old musicals and thought I was in love with Vera Ellen and her gorgeous legs. Gene Kelly was definitely America's best athletic dancer and proves by some of the scenes in this video. Lot of hard work must have went into editing all those scenes to match the rhythm of Jackson's song. Just proves that music taste can change but rhythm never changes.
George

Hi Dr-GO,
It has a Mahavishnu Orchestra Visions of the Emerald Beyond sound to it.
Very Good!

@Kehaulani said in Does a large bore horn take more air?:

So I'm a little confused.

Could we summarize, then, in layman's terms, that the amount of air required doesn't necessarily depend upon what the bore size is but, rather, upon the collective design of the horn which includes a myriad of factors?

In other words, do some horns take "more air", horn-by-horn, depending on how it's constructed rather than on bore size alone?

Exactly this - horn by horn, depending on how it is constructed, how we hear ourselves, the efficiency of the entire body/mind/mouthpiece/trumpet/playing environment system. Even the term "amount of air" is not correct as our bodies have no measure of this except running out before a phrase is finished. We can believe that the horn is a loose blow indoors, we take it out to an open lake and the same system is like blowing into a brick wall!

@SSmith1226

Thanks, Steve, that was so sweet. The future of music is in great hands.

@GeorgeB said in Opinions on Valve Oils?:

@flugelgirl
...sample pack makes good sense.

...sounds pretty slick to me!

@Dirk020 said in The One:

The 1991 Getzen Eterna 900 LB that crossed my path one year ago made me sell most of my other horns...

Oops! The 1980 Getzen Eterna 900 ML that crossed my path one month ago makes me think selling the LB one...