Is the title supposed to be a joke? "Images that sound" really doesn't _sound_ right to me.
Also I believe the missed out on citing the pioneering work of Snares et al. 2001 [0]
Also I believe the missed out on citing the pioneering work of Snares et al. 2001 [0]
Also thanks for the pointer to Venetian Snares! We had cited "Songs about my Cats" but it somehow got lost in the editing :/ We'll add the citation back in for the next version, and we've cited it on our website for now
My favorite example of hiding an image in a song was in Doom 2016: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzFit0nldf4
Using "sound" on its own as a verb doesn't work in modern English. I don't think even a heavy goods poetic license permits that.
> _makes a representation of the external form of_ that sound
And Sound is a verb here
> Images that _emit or cause to emit sound_
It's a punny title pointing out that it's both at once
I am not an authority on English, but using sound as a verb seems common, and idiomatic. Not sure where you got this idea.
It's almost never seen naked except when talking about "how something sounds" which follows from the latter usage above.
We're beyond grammar and in the weeds of idiomatic usage, but hopefully it's clear to English speakers that "it sounds" full stop is so eyebrow-raising that it should normally be avoided.
Unless you're being clever or meta, as the title here is, so it gets a pass in my opinion.
If it were written idiomatically, though, it'd be "images that make sounds".