Can this synth be microtuned yet? I (and others) have asked about this before but previously got ignored.
Thanks for your time.
Fathom Synth Development Thread
-
- KVRAF
- 3735 posts since 17 Sep, 2016
List of Microtonal Software Plugins
http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/List+ ... re+Plugins
http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/List+ ... re+Plugins
Windows 10 and too many plugins
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
No, currently it can not be microtuned.
I could not find in the link above a description of what exactly micro-tuning is.
How much resolution or precision is needed?
Should this be saved per preset, per track, or globally?
Please provide link to micro-tuning so I can do that in the next release.
I could not find in the link above a description of what exactly micro-tuning is.
How much resolution or precision is needed?
Should this be saved per preset, per track, or globally?
Please provide link to micro-tuning so I can do that in the next release.
-
- KVRist
- 339 posts since 31 Jan, 2014 from Denmark
Not an expert in the subject, but this page seems pretty good:
http://www.merkabamusic.com/media/blog/ ... ple-guide/
http://www.merkabamusic.com/media/blog/ ... ple-guide/
I can't lie to you about your chances, but... you have my sympathies.
-
- KVRAF
- 3735 posts since 17 Sep, 2016
The Merkaba link posted above appears to be a good summary.FathomSynth wrote:No, currently it can not be microtuned.
I could not find in the link above a description of what exactly micro-tuning is.
How much resolution or precision is needed?
Should this be saved per preset, per track, or globally?
Please provide link to micro-tuning so I can do that in the next release.
This wiki explains microtuning in general: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microtonal_musicBy changing the tuning of our instruments away from the 'standard' western Equal Temperament tuning we are able to access and explore different feeling and resonance our music.
Here is a commonly used import file format for use with synthesizers with an internal tuning table: http://www.huygens-fokker.org/scala/
Windows 10 and too many plugins
-
Scrubbing Monkeys Scrubbing Monkeys https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=397259 - KVRAF
- 1608 posts since 21 Apr, 2017 from Bahia, Brazil
FathomSynth wrote:New Fathom Video, Wave Morphing Melody.
The song "Mountain Climber" uses Fathom's wave table oscillator and a double modulated LFO to mimic the varying vibrato of a human voice. Both the oscillator pitch and wave table position are modulated with the same LFO which in turn is modulated with an ADSR on both the amplitude and frequency.
Also, please post your comments on the new sound bank Aggressive Edges. We will be using your ideas for the next bank.
https://youtu.be/3k6cn0CinY8
Well that's impressive. Nice rich sound. I liked the way you morphed between instances in the video.
We jumped the fence because it was a fence not be cause the grass was greener.
https://scrubbingmonkeys.bandcamp.com/
https://sites.google.com/view/scrubbing-monkeys
https://scrubbingmonkeys.bandcamp.com/
https://sites.google.com/view/scrubbing-monkeys
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
_al_, zzz00m, RAM will be fixed in the next release 2.19.
RAM footprint will go from 1.6 GB to 150 MB.
Hard to believe, but two major changes will accomplish this.
1) Fixed the processor so that changing the settings wave buffer size will also change the global oscillator tables.
2) Changed the GUI so that images are only loaded when a window becomes visible.
For the buffer size changing it from 16384 to 1024 will cut the total buffer memory to one sixteenth the size, and 1024 buffers is still reasonably good audio quality.
Loading GUI images only when windows become visible will be a setting so you can turn it on and off. The reason this makes so much difference is because there are a zillian pages that no longer need to have their images loaded until they are needed. Not sure why I didn't do this from the very beginning.
Both changes together reduced the total memory size from 1.6 GB to 150 MB or 0.150 GB.
If both Basic Waveforms and Super Saw are added allocating all the oscillator tables the RAM is 250 MB, still a big improvement.
Going even further and doing the following:
Set GUI size to default.
Turn off spline buffers.
Set buffer size to 512.
sets the total RAM size to 110 MB.
RAM footprint will go from 1.6 GB to 150 MB.
Hard to believe, but two major changes will accomplish this.
1) Fixed the processor so that changing the settings wave buffer size will also change the global oscillator tables.
2) Changed the GUI so that images are only loaded when a window becomes visible.
For the buffer size changing it from 16384 to 1024 will cut the total buffer memory to one sixteenth the size, and 1024 buffers is still reasonably good audio quality.
Loading GUI images only when windows become visible will be a setting so you can turn it on and off. The reason this makes so much difference is because there are a zillian pages that no longer need to have their images loaded until they are needed. Not sure why I didn't do this from the very beginning.
Both changes together reduced the total memory size from 1.6 GB to 150 MB or 0.150 GB.
If both Basic Waveforms and Super Saw are added allocating all the oscillator tables the RAM is 250 MB, still a big improvement.
Going even further and doing the following:
Set GUI size to default.
Turn off spline buffers.
Set buffer size to 512.
sets the total RAM size to 110 MB.
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
Yes, it will be brilliant, sorry I did not do this from the beginning, was not complicated.
I will get 2.19 out as soon as possible.
I will get 2.19 out as soon as possible.
-
- KVRAF
- 8845 posts since 6 Jan, 2017 from Outer Space
I have a simple question: Is it possible to install the solo and the full version side by side? Do they have different uuids?
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
It depends on the host. I do it all the time in Ableton and it works fine.
But they do not have different ID numbers, so some hosts might think they are the same.
But they do not have different ID numbers, so some hosts might think they are the same.
-
- KVRAF
- 8845 posts since 6 Jan, 2017 from Outer Space
Which version would a saved session load then? But the main question behind it, is the stripped down version eating less CPU than the full version set to mono?
-
- KVRian
- 568 posts since 28 Oct, 2014
That is amazing! Anything under 300 is in line with my other synths.FathomSynth wrote:_al_, zzz00m, RAM will be fixed in the next release 2.19.
RAM footprint will go from 1.6 GB to 150 MB.
Hard to believe, but two major changes will accomplish this.
Really appreciate you making this a priority
-
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 1580 posts since 25 Mar, 2017
TJ, Hosts like Ableton are smart enough to know the file name of the plugin DLL and will load the same DLL that was used on the same track the last time the session was open.
To answer the fundamental question. The default state of both products use the exact same CPU on a mono melody.
The mono version will eat less CPU on chords because it can only play one note. But the pro version will eat the exact same CPU if you set polyphonic voices to one. Keep in mind that the mono and pro version are running the exact same code. The only difference is that the mono version can only play one voice and has some features disabled. But the mono version is certainly not more efficient.
However, the above only applies to the default state of both products.
In reality the pro version is much more efficient because it gives you access to processor parameters and you can change things to make it more efficient, such as going into draft mode. The mono version can not do this.
I'm fairly certain that once you have the pro version there is no reason to be running the mono version, since you can always just set the pro version to once voice.
To answer the fundamental question. The default state of both products use the exact same CPU on a mono melody.
The mono version will eat less CPU on chords because it can only play one note. But the pro version will eat the exact same CPU if you set polyphonic voices to one. Keep in mind that the mono and pro version are running the exact same code. The only difference is that the mono version can only play one voice and has some features disabled. But the mono version is certainly not more efficient.
However, the above only applies to the default state of both products.
In reality the pro version is much more efficient because it gives you access to processor parameters and you can change things to make it more efficient, such as going into draft mode. The mono version can not do this.
I'm fairly certain that once you have the pro version there is no reason to be running the mono version, since you can always just set the pro version to once voice.
