Erm, it's already there: "saw up, saw down, triangle, square" (from manual, p10).Sendy wrote:If you do add extra LFO waveforms please add square and sawtooth if possible, these two are awesome for lo-fi and glitchy stuff.
Cheers,
LiteOn
Erm, it's already there: "saw up, saw down, triangle, square" (from manual, p10).Sendy wrote:If you do add extra LFO waveforms please add square and sawtooth if possible, these two are awesome for lo-fi and glitchy stuff.
The LFO is already continuously variable with the asym knob between saw up / tri / saw down, with curve at 0%, and then the curve knob varies the straight line segments into exponential / inverse exponential shapes with almost right angles at 100% and -100%. With the curve at full you get pwm with the asym knob.Sendy wrote:If you do add extra LFO waveforms please add square and sawtooth if possible, these two are awesome for lo-fi and glitchy stuff.
andy_cytomic wrote:The LFO is already continuously variable with the asym knob between saw up / tri / saw down, with curve at 0%, and then the curve knob varies the straight line segments into exponential / inverse exponential shapes with almost right angles at 100% and -100%. With the curve at full you get pwm with the asym knob.Sendy wrote:If you do add extra LFO waveforms please add square and sawtooth if possible, these two are awesome for lo-fi and glitchy stuff.
Do you feel having a one shot mode more important that unipolar? I am leaning towards that myself but appreciate comments from others.ZenPunkHippy wrote:That does sound like a winning solution.
Unipolar is useful, but not so necessary in a plugin with a small number of target parameters.
Peace,
Andy.
There is also the case of when the envelope modulates the depth of the LFO, with bipolar vs unipolar you get a different result, but still I think having the LFO as bipolar only isn't a deal breaker compared to the added functionality of sine and one shot. My main reservation about adding a sine button is that people will get confused at first glance not understand what shape you get when this button is off, as well as not understanding that with the sine mode on you don't always get a pure sine wave!ZenPunkHippy wrote:The extra functionality provided by "single shot" mode outweighs the minor workflow change required to achieve the same results as uni-polar mode IMO.
Peace,
Andy.
It is clicks we like.ZenPunkHippy wrote:Also single shot mode would only make sense for actual LFO rates - audio rate modulation would not be terribly useful "once" (unless you like clicks).
Peace,
Andy.
What if you make it a LFO Mode I/II type thing, instead of calling it sine?andy_cytomic wrote:There is also the case of when the envelope modulates the depth of the LFO, with bipolar vs unipolar you get a different result, but still I think having the LFO as bipolar only isn't a deal breaker compared to the added functionality of sine and one shot. My main reservation about adding a sine button is that people will get confused at first glance not understand what shape you get when this button is off, as well as not understanding that with the sine mode on you don't always get a pure sine wave!ZenPunkHippy wrote:The extra functionality provided by "single shot" mode outweighs the minor workflow change required to achieve the same results as uni-polar mode IMO.
Peace,
Andy.
Me too. So yes, if there's only either/or I would go for Sine/Once and pass on Uni.andy_cytomic wrote:..., but still I think having the LFO as bipolar only isn't a deal breaker compared to the added functionality of sine and one shot.
Right now, I don't know either what will happen if I push the sine button, eg. is it to replace the triangle or just adding another flavor to the morphable spectrum.andy_cytomic wrote:My main reservation about adding a sine button is that people will get confused at first glance not understand what shape you get when this button is off, as well as not understanding that with the sine mode on you don't always get a pure sine wave!
It's not about manufacturing expense, it is about brain drain. I'm already having reservations about adding a Sine button since it is just too unclear what it will do without reading a manual, which is not ideal! Too many buttons and options that aren't really useful just slow down workflow. I would rather sacrifice some features than make the plugin unwieldy to use. How many buttons / knobs does your average LFO have? This one already has 8 knobs, two toggle buttons, a trigger button, and two mode switches!LiteOn wrote:Does that mean enlarging the gui vertically is completely out of scope (for instance, by adding another 'row')? I mean it's not a physical device, so adding more space would be rather cheap.
Cheers,
LiteOn
I see the dilemma, and since I also prefer the more easy approaches for 1.0 I could happily live with going for Sine/Once and skipping Uni.andy_cytomic wrote:It's not about manufacturing expense, it is about brain drain. I'm already having reservations about adding a Sine button since it is just too unclear what it will do without reading a manual, which is not ideal! Too many buttons and options that aren't really useful just slow down workflow. I would rather sacrifice some features than make the plugin unwieldy to use. How many buttons / knobs does your average LFO have? This one already has 8 knobs, two toggle buttons, a trigger button, and two mode switches!
How about a multimode Uni/Sine/Once button? It's state would be controlled by its own dedicated LFO.andy_cytomic wrote: How many people think the "Uni" button is essential? I can replace the "Uni" button that with a "Sine" button
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2024
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement