suggestion: partial manipulation

[hellleutel]

I think I've already mentioned that, but after some weeks with z2 want to confirm once more:
Zebra is (among others) a mighty additive synthesis machine but lacks possibility of adjusting the partials precisely; so in future versions, I think it would be a huge benefit to

know exactly which partial is at which level and have a convenient way to adjust (either with a "select" and "level" knob at the right or with a huge zoom of the editor. Or the mouse pointer changes and shows the partial no. while moving over the editor.

have a graphical mark for the of the octaves in the spectrum

have maybe even macros (The K5000 had some) to raise or lower: even partials, odd, octaves, high, low etc. at a time.

That would be so great.

see you

ulrich

[Urs]

Yep, that stuff is noted.

I want to see if I can cover some of these things by preset scripts, such as switching between absolute and logarithmic power, or if it might be better to have a couple of switches to employ different modes. Or maybe add some stuff to the OSC FX in order to have it dynamically modulatable (That "odd for even" effect does already offer some great means to emphasize either odd or even partials).

Gonna work on that when Z2.0 is out and everything else is updated to the latest version of the engine (Intel Macs, preset scripting etc.)

Later,

Urs

[markoos]

That was something I was hoping for in the TERA3 update - and as it hasn't happened, that could be a clincher for me to switch to Z2.

[Urs]

That was something I was hoping for in the TERA3 update - and as it hasn't happened, that could be a clincher for me to switch to Z2.

Hehehe, this would be the right place to make a promise... but honestly, I need some breath inbetween... this stuff is in the back of my mind, but I don't know yet when to get into this...

Cheers,

Urs

[AnalogGuy1]

I know Urs is probably in the midst of delivery pains with the giant Z2 baby right now so its no time to ask about Z3, but...tweaking partial frequencies to intevals slighly other than integer frequency multiples would be really nice too. Like a CA5k module, but without the morphing stuff.

[Urs]

tweaking partial frequencies to intevals slighly other than integer frequency multiples would be really nice too.

Now, if Ben of CamelAudio would send me a tutorial on how to do that in realtime, I'm all for this

Later,

Urs

[markoos]

... regarding this partial-editing thing - this is just something I've had rattling around in my head for a while, and I wanted to get it put down to get some feedback...:

Would it be a good idea to make it possible to be able to pan each individual, or group, of partials by using LFOs. Maybe each oscillator could be given this superwide spread by partial panning, like specified groups of partials being panned rythmically through the mod matrix.

Then you could have each partial, or group, pan slowly across the field from hard left to hard right, for example, swapping sides. And if each oscilator could do this, maybe it could be a killer feature... is there any way this could be done just to see what it would sound like? I would LOVE to hear an example.

Like I say Urs, just a thought, I'm not trying to make any demands!

[Urs]

Pheww... markoos, that is a tough one. I had thought about stuff like that, but I voted for an easier to handle approach in Zebra. I see the whole waveform editing thing in Zebra2 as an add-on to the overall modular approach, but not so much as the central application. Thus I think the current selection of tools (maybe with added partial grouping or whatever) offers just the right compromise between flexibility and ease of use...

In fact have a another synth in the back of my mind that might deliver just that. It would need the whole gui for just the partial manipulation tools. But that's just an assembly of ideas, nothing is set in stone here...

Cheers,

Urs

[markoos]

Thanks a lot for the feedback Urs - I've had that idea for a while but didn't know who/where to ask. Its good not to be laughed off the web! (I have no coding knowledge, so I don't know how difficult it could be to implement this)

I would be VERY interested in a synth which could mod partials (or groups of) like this... should you ever create a prototype, I'd be more than happy to alpha or beta. As far as I know, this feature isn't very common in exsisting synths, so I kind of see it as a potential 'new' synthesis method (PPS - Partial Panning Synthesis?!)...

anyway, it would be great if you would bear me in mind if you ever decide its worth trying - even if just as an experiment.

[pdxindy]

Pheww... markoos, that is a tough one. I had thought about stuff like that, but I voted for an easier to handle approach in Zebra. I see the whole waveform editing thing in Zebra2 as an add-on to the overall modular approach, but not so much as the central application. Thus I think the current selection of tools (maybe with added partial grouping or whatever) offers just the right compromise between flexibility and ease of use...

In fact have a another synth in the back of my mind that might deliver just that. It would need the whole gui for just the partial manipulation tools. But that's just an assembly of ideas, nothing is set in stone here...

Cheers,

Urs

I agree... I like the ease of use of the Zebra2 GUI... this sounds like a lot to add for such specific control. But maybe for the future, you could add a oscfx type that did some funky partial manipulations/panning thing, esp on dual/quad osc. Don't know if that is feasible, but would fit in the GUI concept at least.

Also, markoos, you could use an FM module for the fundamental and then add 3-4 osc's with different partials and then pan those osc's around. That would give you something of what you are talking about. I just tried it and with some delay and reverb it shimmers and moves around nicely

[AnalogGuy1]

Urs wrote

jcsquire1 wrote:
tweaking partial frequencies to intevals slighly other than integer frequency multiples would be really nice too.

Now, if Ben of CamelAudio would send me a tutorial on how to do that in realtime, I'm all for this

Urs, not sure what you mean "realtime"...I didn't mean anything in the SSE stream, but something much simpler; just use the partial tweaking to build a wavetable like I guess you already do:
for (int harmonic = 1; harmonic<64; harmonic++)
osc1[sample] += amp*sin(2*pi*fundFreq*(harmonic*(1+partialTweak[harmonic])*sample/sampleFreq)

[Urs]

Urs wrote

jcsquire1 wrote:
tweaking partial frequencies to intevals slighly other than integer frequency multiples would be really nice too.

Now, if Ben of CamelAudio would send me a tutorial on how to do that in realtime, I'm all for this

Urs, not sure what you mean "realtime"...I didn't mean anything in the SSE stream, but something much simpler; just use the partial tweaking to build a wavetable like I guess you already do:
for (int harmonic = 1; harmonic<64; harmonic++)
osc1[sample] += amp*sin(2*pi*fundFreq*(harmonic*(1+partialTweak[harmonic])*sample/sampleFreq)

Well, here's the problem: If the partial is not an integer multiple of the fundamental frequency, it is not cyclic within the wavetable... it gets cropped, to the result that it ends up as an assemby of integer partials.

So one can either use a cpu saving wavebuffering or tunable partials, but not both together.

Cheers,

Urs

[AnalogGuy1]

D'oh! I see...you'd have to make, say, 32 wavetables of different lengths with an array of 32 pointers, and add them all up in the SSE stream. Thanks for showing me how tough this problem is! My money's still on you if you and Ben met in a dark alley...

[markoos]

Also, markoos, you could use an FM module for the fundamental and then add 3-4 osc's with different partials and then pan those osc's around...

hey pdx, nice suggestion - i'll give it a try, see what happens. that's a nice little workaround for some basic experimentation

[Urs]

Btw...

I could write some scripts for the SpectroBlend osc modes that distribute partials among oscillators, i.e. full octaves on one, odds on another and two sets of evens on the last two. Or whatever scheme you prefer...

It would actually be easy to do...

Cheers,

Urs