Thanks. I guess its because optimized code for a simple well-known waveform is faster than processing a look-up table.Urs wrote: Sat Dec 15, 2018 5:39 pmThe built-in waveforms draw even less CPU.lengro wrote: Sat Dec 15, 2018 3:24 pm I've wondered for a while - is there any difference in sound quality, between:
1) inbuilt basic waveforms
2) equivalent .umh script (for example: sin(2*pi*x) vs inbuilt sine)
3) imported wav (for example: full resolution perfect sine)
If not, why not just go full wavetable, so selecting inbuilt sine would draw a sine in first frame?
But soundwise its the same.
I really enjoy fiddling with .uhm scripts, it is very elegant thought out. Not that I have invented any interesting wavetables, but I learn a lot about sound creation.
Any plans expanding the language with constansts - e.g. _cutoff=2000, instead of hardcoding numbers in formulas?
I think it would help readability and reduce the need for comments.

