Problem modulating sample start in TX16Wx
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 5 posts since 29 Jan, 2011
Hello, I need to modulate the sample start with a LFO, so that the sample starts in different poistion at each pressed midi note. So I routed an LFO to the "Wave start" with the matrix. It works but there's a problem: in (more or less) 50% of the pressed notes the sample starts from the beginning, and not a random position. I supposed that this happens because you ignore negative LFO output values in some way... Any solutions?
thanks
thanks
-
- KVRAF
- 2394 posts since 27 May, 2005 from Stockholm
Yes, a LFO will be negative half of the time, and a purely negative value will not help with an initial start position set to zero.
If you change the sample start to be half of your modulation strength you should get the result you want (equal distribution from zero to full modulation).
If you change the sample start to be half of your modulation strength you should get the result you want (equal distribution from zero to full modulation).
TX16Wx Software Sampler:
http://www.tx16wx.com/
http://www.tx16wx.com/
-
- KVRer
- Topic Starter
- 5 posts since 29 Jan, 2011
Sorry I did not explain well. That's exactly what I did. Of course if I set the "Start" in the wave panel at position zero the LFO negative values are ignored.elcallio wrote:Yes, a LFO will be negative half of the time, and a purely negative value will not help with an initial start position set to zero.
If you change the sample start to be half of your modulation strength you should get the result you want (equal distribution from zero to full modulation).
Just set the "Start" to the middle of the file (from the wave panel) and modulated it: half of the pressed notes start from the "Start" position. What I expected: sometimes the sample starts AFTER the "Start", sometimes BEFORE. Sorry for the mess with this "start" word. I hope you understand what I mean
It looks like the negative values are ignored even if the "Start" position is in the (let'say) middle of the file...
-
- KVRAF
- 2394 posts since 27 May, 2005 from Stockholm
Doh, yes, indeed. Looking at the code, I see that starting phase is clamped to [start, <wave size>]. Maybe it should be clamped to [0, <wave size>] instead. Though that is a behaviour change...
I'd like to hear from other users, if that is an ok change (if people depend on the current behaviour, it is not - though I doubt this is the case).
You can workaround to get the behaviour you are looking for by (example)
* Set wave start to zero
* Set ENV1 l0 = 1
* Add ENV1 -> wave start : 1s
* Add LFO1 -> wave start : 1s
The ENV1 modulation (always 1) will offset the LFO1 value by half, so in effect you will get a LFO going from 0->2s (adjust values as desired).
The downside is that you have to sacrifice an envelope (or SEQ - works to)
I'd like to hear from other users, if that is an ok change (if people depend on the current behaviour, it is not - though I doubt this is the case).
You can workaround to get the behaviour you are looking for by (example)
* Set wave start to zero
* Set ENV1 l0 = 1
* Add ENV1 -> wave start : 1s
* Add LFO1 -> wave start : 1s
The ENV1 modulation (always 1) will offset the LFO1 value by half, so in effect you will get a LFO going from 0->2s (adjust values as desired).
The downside is that you have to sacrifice an envelope (or SEQ - works to)
TX16Wx Software Sampler:
http://www.tx16wx.com/
http://www.tx16wx.com/
-
- KVRer
- 29 posts since 25 Oct, 2016
I know this is quite an old thread but I would appreciate that change, i've had this problem myself. I figured out that workaround but would prefer if I didn't have to do it, and like you say you lose an ENV.
cheers
cheers
-
- KVRer
- 17 posts since 17 Dec, 2017
I'd be fine with that change too, it's closer to how I thought it would have worked when I tried something like this as well.