One Synth Challenge #192: Six Sines by BaconPaul (johnkhf Wins!)

[67maxx]

...

[emikaela]

Great that new functionality is being added, unfortunately this also results in the challenge not becoming pure because of this. I am done with my input, so I am not using any new features.
At the start of a challenge, in my opinion, nothing more should be changed to the synth, though bugfixxes of course.
Best regards, John

i think this is a risk that you choose to take when finishing early. same for everyone. the osc has no mandate to tell developers that they can't update their synths during the month. at most we can ask nicely, but doing so would be a shame if the challenge serves as inspiration to add cool new features that may not have happened otherwise.

[baconpaul]

In Studio One 7 I can't manually type in values for the operator multiplier after I right click. I start trying to type in the text box and it acts like the plugin isn't even open and instead typing causes hotkey actions in my DAW. Pretty difficult to make sounds if I can't set the tuning of sounds except to leave it default.

Would be nice if the synth had a hotkey to lock to whole number multiples on the operators.

Same to me (Studio One 7 Windows 11). The right click doesn't work both in Nightly Vts3 and Clap. It is odd because the Sun Feb 02, 2025 (I don't remember the version number) was working, at least with the Clap version.

Ok I’ll try and look this weekend. The change which fixed live I thought fixed s1 also but maybe I missed something

[FrogsInPants]

I have no idea what I am doing, but one question: Is this kind of pitch shifting effect in exp-fm mode an expected effect of this mode?

With exponential FM, upward modulation shifts the frequency more than downward modulation, so a symmetric modulator will result in an average upward shift in frequency.

In addition, some of the waveforms are unidirectional. With either linear or exponential FM, these will only shift the frequency in one direction.

[empphryio]

Great that new functionality is being added, unfortunately this also results in the challenge not becoming pure because of this. I am done with my input, so I am not using any new features.
At the start of a challenge, in my opinion, nothing more should be changed to the synth, though bugfixxes of course.
Best regards, John

i think this is a risk that you choose to take when finishing early. same for everyone. the osc has no mandate to tell developers that they can't update their synths during the month. at most we can ask nicely, but doing so would be a shame if the challenge serves as inspiration to add cool new features that may not have happened otherwise.

Yes. Exactly. And it's not that serious a challenge. I'm also finished with mine (basically two at this point actually) and I'm totally fine with developers continuing to improve their synths. Thank you Mr. Baconpaul.

[] Peter:H []

Great that new functionality is being added, unfortunately this also results in the challenge not becoming pure because of this. I am done with my input, so I am not using any new features.
At the start of a challenge, in my opinion, nothing more should be changed to the synth, though bugfixxes of course.
Best regards, John

I see it the same way. I think the 30 days programming challenge ended with an alpha version (definition of alpha version = not feature complete and users should expect bugs) entering Osc. And it will evolve to beta during the 30 days of osc (beta = features complete, still users should expect bugs). And you are right, folks that start late will see a way different synth than folks that started early.

[baconpaul]

Ahh nothing quite like a kvr forum thread to give you crap for shipping interesting new features on a free synth! Chuckle.

Look more seriously, I’m get it and am somewhat sympathetic. The osc team chose six sines when it was 25 days old (and I agreed) and that’s been amazing for me as a dev. But perhaps I should have said no and waited. That would be a real bummer - the feedback quality here is super high and some of the library fixes are feeding into other open and closed source projects.

But it does indeed mean that the synth (which has had 44 changes applied in the 14 days since the contest started) is more dynamic than normal. If there’s something I can do to help compensate for the warping effect that has on the challenge let me know

My rough view is that none of the new features would make or break a composition but they are useful indeed - especially the low frequency key track option.

And of course thanks to all supportive folks here

[Vospi]

Another typo on the site:
https://sites.google.com/site/kvrosc/2025
192 - Febnuary - Six Sines

[johnkhf]

I am fairly new here and it was not clear to me that we as participants are also a kind of beta tester.
I actually like that and I see that Paul acts quickly on feedback, which is great. I am curious to see how Six Sines will develop.
Paul thanks for your special synth, I will keep an eye on its development.
Regards,John

[baconpaul]

I am fairly new here and it was not clear to me that we as participants are also a kind of beta tester.
I actually like that and I see that Paul acts quickly on feedback, which is great. I am curious to see how Six Sines will develop.
Paul thanks for your special synth, I will keep an eye on its development.
Regards,John

I think this OSC (and the first surge one) are somewhat unique in that regard. Hence my sympathy!

Like I said the feedback here has been awesome! I really appreciate it and am sympathetic with the mild frustration that results.

[] Peter:H []

Ahh nothing quite like a kvr forum thread to give you crap for shipping interesting new features on a free synth! Chuckle.

Look more seriously, I’m get it and am somewhat sympathetic. The osc team chose six sines when it was 25 days old (and I agreed) and that’s been amazing for me as a dev. But perhaps I should have said no and waited. That would be a real bummer - the feedback quality here is super high and some of the library fixes are feeding into other open and closed source projects.

But it does indeed mean that the synth (which has had 44 changes applied in the 14 days since the contest started) is more dynamic than normal. If there’s something I can do to help compensate for the warping effect that has on the challenge let me know

My rough view is that none of the new features would make or break a composition but they are useful indeed - especially the low frequency key track option.

And of course thanks to all supportive folks here

Nobody has anything against new features. Who has said that? please quote the concrete message.

You can solve this by "the rules", i.e. restrict the challenge to 1.0.5 and a bug fixing/branching strategy, i.e. bugs are fixed in 1.0.5 and new features go into 1.1 beta. Sure little more overhead to merge 1.0.5 fixes back to 1.1.
I think a level playing field has some value which should be respected, shouldn't it?

[Andreya_Autumn]

I am fairly new here and it was not clear to me that we as participants are also a kind of beta tester.
I actually like that and I see that Paul acts quickly on feedback, which is great. I am curious to see how Six Sines will develop.
Paul thanks for your special synth, I will keep an eye on its development.
Regards,John

In case you don't know, you can submit more than once. Sometimes people even submit more than one tune (though only one of them counts as your entry in the end). So if you did want to use any of the new features in your track, you still can!

[empphryio]

Ahh nothing quite like a kvr forum thread to give you crap for shipping interesting new features on a free synth! Chuckle.

Look more seriously, I’m get it and am somewhat sympathetic. The osc team chose six sines when it was 25 days old (and I agreed) and that’s been amazing for me as a dev. But perhaps I should have said no and waited. That would be a real bummer - the feedback quality here is super high and some of the library fixes are feeding into other open and closed source projects.

But it does indeed mean that the synth (which has had 44 changes applied in the 14 days since the contest started) is more dynamic than normal. If there’s something I can do to help compensate for the warping effect that has on the challenge let me know

My rough view is that none of the new features would make or break a composition but they are useful indeed - especially the low frequency key track option.

And of course thanks to all supportive folks here

Nobody has anything against new features. Who has said that? please quote the concrete message.

You can solve this by "the rules", i.e. restrict the challenge to 1.0.5 and a bug fixing/branching strategy, i.e. bugs are fixed in 1.0.5 and new features go into 1.1 beta. Sure little more overhead to merge 1.0.5 fixes back to 1.1.
I think a level playing field has some value which should be respected, shouldn't it?

This is absolutely not the developer's responsibility. Please feel free to lobby Richard for a rule change.

[Andreya_Autumn]

I think a level playing field has some value which should be respected, shouldn't it?

The playing field already is level.

Everyone gets the exact same amount of time with/without the new features. And music made on the older feature set doesn't degrade in any way due to the new feature set existing. If you've made a good song it's still a good song.

If there is a way to make your song better using linear FM (which there might be of course), you have the exact same amount of time to make that a reality as the next person does.


Besides, I don't think anyone would want bug fixes to be forbidden during a challenge. And drawing the line between a bug fix and a feature improvement can be tricky sometimes. I really don't think there's any cause for concern here.

[] Peter:H []

Submission https://soundcloud.com/p-e-t-e-r-h/six- ... hall-shine
Details later