AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.This graph
(https://www.desmos.com/calculator/344tfiwdd0) shows the error from using a simplified volume scaling formula versus a properly frequency-corrected one. At 96,000Hz sample rate and 7,040Hz fundamental frequency, the simplified scaling factor is 0.9738 times the correct factor; at 4,186 fundamental frequency (the highest key on most pianos), the simplified scaling factor is 0.9907 times the correct factor; below 520Hz, it's 0.9999 times the correct factor; and it's correct at 0Hz.
Is that acceptable error, or should I stick to scaling by the frequency-corrected formula? This is going to affect LFOs (but who cares, at 99.99% correct?) and saw/square/triangle waves used as modulators in phase modulator or ring modulation.
(I might need it to be frequency-corrected if I hard-sync sine waves, due to a slightly-cheaty method of anti-aliasing hard-sync I came up with one morning while confused and half-awake, but I'm considering just only allowing saw/square/triangle hard-sync and giving up on hard-sync sine.)