MeldaProduction

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 4:54 pm

And you won't believe it, I now have a case where I indeed need a frequency range of 10-12 octaves for a filter env! 8 is not enough. And everybody will hear the difference. The filter has to go from +8 to around -3 for the sound I need. With the current range I can either go from +8 to 0 or from +5 to -3, both of which do not sound perfect.

Since it's a bass, I solved this by setting it to monophonic mode and used an LFO in ENV mode for it, this way I can create the larger span going from +8 to -3.

Just saying, the need for a range greater than +8 is real. Not often, but sometimes.

Whatever, I don't think it would be widely used, even more rarely in a polyphonic case, so the benefit would be low.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 5:29 pm

So the randomizer bug - crap, you found a big one!

Will be solved

.

10-12 octaves filter env - well I'd really like to hear that

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:05 pm

OK. It's a really pure (analog

) bass, solely one saw osc with one 12db filter, that's it. Resonance is low because otherwise the closing envelope would have that typical resonance sound. So, because the filter is only 12db and resonance is low, it starts cutting the highs quite early. The filter should come to rest at -2 octaves so the sustain is really smooth. Now if you use the normal env you start at -2 + 8 = +6 octaves, which is not really fully open. If you use an LFO you can go all the way from +8 to -2 making a 10 octave range.

The difference is not huge, but it's there.

http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3347 ... LFOEnv.mp3

The filter "bite" in the attack phase has more highs in the second repetition.

Edit: ok, I have to turn up the volume to be able to hear the difference on my cheap hifi stereo, but I can hear it easily on my monitor speakers.

Also, the second envelope sounds a little muddier in total. I guess that is because it's broken onto a rather coarse grid, you said something like this a while ago? Though it has more highs, it sounds less exact compared to the first.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:23 pm

Aaaaha, interesting

.

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:43 pm

MeldaProduction wrote:Aaaaha, interesting .

What do you mean, interesting???!?!?!?!

You mean interesting as in "those stupid audio purists moaning about stuff that nobody hears?"

No seriously, I admit that the difference is small, but it's there, and Diva type of guys (which there are a lot of) will notice this.

Anyway, I agree it's not a big issue. But after all, is it true that the filter envelope works more accurate / with better time resolution than the global LFO in env mode? Or is the difference in sound because one envelope spans 8 octaves and the other 10? If the former, I think I would rather pass the bit of extra highs for a tighter envelope.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sat Oct 25, 2014 11:52 pm

What causes the difference? Who knows... But I'm afraid there's nothing I can do now, backward compatibility. And this really looks like a very rare case, not worth the trouble.

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:28 am

MeldaProduction wrote:What causes the difference? Who knows... But I'm afraid there's nothing I can do now, backward compatibility. And this really looks like a very rare case, not worth the trouble.

But, from a programming view, is there a technical difference between LFOs and Filter Envs? Or are they calculated with the same time accuracy / resolution?

Some things depend on the automation protection, but I haven't fully understood which these are.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:29 am

There's a huge difference. Filter envs are per sample, while mods are granularized to save CPU, try extreme modulator protection, you'll see what I mean

.

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:34 am

MeldaProduction wrote:Filter envs are per sample, while mods are granularized

That's what I had in mind. OK then I will use the filter env option and live without the missing 2 octaves in range

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:46 am

Hehe yeah

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 12:50 am

So, after all, I really like that patch

Doesn't it sound surprisingly raw and analog? Such a great bite in the bass region of the saw oscillator. Really a plain single osc w/o any unison or effects, a single 12db filter, and just some saturation/drive to simulate tube behaviour. If you turn up the volume it feels like standing in front of a Doepfer system

I love it

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:45 am

Yep

and nice image

, but MPowerSynth is much more complex

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 10:50 am

Argghghhh I need the max voices to work

Don't know, is "Diffuser Filter" just another term for "CPU Killer"?

The patch I am programming is not extreme, it has 5 seconds release (ok that is considerably long), and the Diffuser filter. And it kills my CPU with one big chord.

CableChannel · Post by **CableChannel** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:12 am

Bug: when I am in the Reverb presets, Halls folder, there are two presets called Large Curch (don't know if I created the second one as a variation of the first, or if it was there from the start). Now if I step trough the presets using the arrow buttons, it goes like Large dark -> Large Church -> Cathedral -> Large Church -> Cathedral -> Large Church -> ...
It kinda hangs in a Cathedral / Large Church Loop

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Sun Oct 26, 2014 11:28 am

Ups, duplicit names... I'll see how to solve that...
Anyway about the voices - don't worry

(email!)

MeldaProduction

KVR Audio

MPowerSynth improvements & feature requests