KVR Audio

Johan of Transvaal · Post by **Johan of Transvaal** » Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:45 pm

I guess it's better to just register here than continue to have some sort of indirect conversation with you people via my website. Thanks again for all the praise and feedback. blortblort and Reverse Engineer are right about how the effects of a preset depend on the specific input given, that was one of the reasons why I didn't include presets in the first version.

Lost Technology's current version number is supposed to emphasize that it's the first release and that it's not quite ready for mission-critical usage. The feature set is already complete, more or less, but there is still a lot of cleanup, testing and algorithm tweaking I want to do.

Then there's the extended feature set I've been thinking about, including MIDI support and flexible signal routing. That stuff might be incorporated in LT before the 1.0 release, but I'm also considering leaving it out and releasing another plug-in with the extra features. It might be a good idea to keep offering "classic" LT as a more straightforward option. (There's some more information about this in the release plan on the website.)

dubbyah · Post by **dubbyah** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:19 am

one thing I noticed also is that this plugin can really hurt your ears if you listen to it more then 10 minutes... its just too digital!

uvacom · Post by **uvacom** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:53 pm

Hmm...I used it for two consecutive hours last night, it didn't seem to cause me any problems - other than my mind being freaking blown!!

Heh, seriously - you could try turning up the oversampling/smoothing/interpolation, that'll de-harsh a bit, post-EQ couldn't hurt either. Also, I've found that many of the modulation control settings produce the most useable results at very low settings.

Liquidclear · Post by **Liquidclear** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:21 pm

Johan, I've been using LT for a week or so and I've very impressed with this unique plugin. Sure, I don't really understand the theory behind it, but it sure make some interesting noises. This really is one of the best effects of the year so far.

The artifacts and ornaments it's add to incoming sound are very useful for minimal-style compositions.

BTW: No problems running in Buzz so far!

uvacom · Post by **uvacom** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:17 pm

Johan - I read that you are planning on possibly including MIDI control in future revisions - might I suggest that if you do that, you also include a simple carrier oscillator that could be gated and/or pitch-controlled by incoming MIDI note messages? Since so many of the "useful" effects that can be had from LT involve a simple oscillator, it would be a very convenient inclusion.

Seus Hawkins · Post by **Seus Hawkins** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:46 pm

Interesting, I'm used to not understanding the VST's I use.

Got a nice bass sound.

Regards

runagate · Post by **runagate** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:42 pm

I am in the process of setting up this wonderful effect for live use.
(At the same time I'm working up some patches for xoxos's new baby
and dtblkfx)

There's a ludicrous amount of depth to the possibilities here. I love it.

Johan of Transvaal · Post by **Johan of Transvaal** » Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:33 pm

uvacom - I'm planning something quite similar to your suggestion. The MIDIInput component will transform note messages directly into frequency and amplitude signals. Frequency values will be taken from a note->frequency lookup table. Amplitude output will be generated by an envelope generator within the MIDI component. Instead of

Code: Select all

(MIDI note) -> MIDIInput -> (carrier) -> Analyzer -> (freq + amp + wave)

I'll do

Code: Select all

(MIDI note) -> MIDIInput -> (freq + amp)

This solution will be more efficient and keep the F and A signals generated from MIDI data free of Analyzer artifacts.

However, your proposal does have the advantage of letting the MIDI component supply a waveform along with the frequency and amplitude. That inspired me to include internal waveform generators in my plans. These generators will provide a bunch of adjustable waveforms (sine, saw/tri, notch, shelf, etc.) and turn LT 1.0 (or whatever I choose to call it) into a self-sufficient MIDI synth.

runagate · Post by **runagate** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:31 pm

Gorblimey.

Is there a possibility of adding a feature that allows the left and right
sides to latch to one another so that the stereo field can be set to a
somewhat equal effect if need be?

This may be the first plug-in I've encountered where the first
couple of times reading through the manual didn't grant me any
new technique for tweaking the effect! I understand it in a vague
way but there's a lot of tiny labels in there and I've got to listen
to just one headphone speaker at a time to tell what my tweaking
is achieving.

Also, I love it and I thank you for it

xoxos · Post by **xoxos** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:30 pm

runagate wrote: (At the same time I'm working up some patches for xoxos's new baby
and dtblkfx)

new v. of that soon with shuffle + filter latency correction so not to bother :p

uvacom · Post by **uvacom** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:31 pm

Johan of Transvaal wrote:uvacom - I'm planning something quite similar to your suggestion. The MIDIInput component will transform note messages directly into frequency and amplitude signals. Frequency values will be taken from a note->frequency lookup table. Amplitude output will be generated by an envelope generator within the MIDI component. Instead of
Code: Select all
(MIDI note) -> MIDIInput -> (carrier) -> Analyzer -> (freq + amp + wave)
I'll do
Code: Select all
(MIDI note) -> MIDIInput -> (freq + amp)
This solution will be more efficient and keep the F and A signals generated from MIDI data free of Analyzer artifacts.

However, your proposal does have the advantage of letting the MIDI component supply a waveform along with the frequency and amplitude. That inspired me to include internal waveform generators in my plans. These generators will provide a bunch of adjustable waveforms (sine, saw/tri, notch, shelf, etc.) and turn LT 1.0 (or whatever I choose to call it) into a self-sufficient MIDI synth.

I like your way better. More elegant than what I was thinking - also, I think bypassing the analyzer for the carrier component and controlling the frequency/amplitude/waveform components directly will help to make LT a little less unwieldy. I actually like the primativeness of the analyzer - it's fun to discover ways to generate signals that the analyzer will interpret "incorrectly" but in interesting ways. But I think that if one has no understanding of how the analyzer is looking at the signal, it gets chaotic pretty easily.

Johan of Transvaal · Post by **Johan of Transvaal** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:18 pm

runagate - That is very much possible and I've actually been thinking about it before. The nicest solution would probably be to allow parameters to be linked on several levels, single parameter, component and whole plug-in. I'll see if I can squeeze this into version 0.2.

uvacom - The Analyzer is definitely the weakest link in LT, at least when it comes to doing what it's supposed to do. I have some very loose ideas about how it could be made more reliable (some kind of autocorrelation?), but nothing solid enough to announce as a planned change.

runagate · Post by **runagate** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 5:56 pm

Well, I don't know that analyzing live audio is such a simple thing.
I'm glad I don't have to try it.

I'm still meaning to send up some demos of what I've made LostTech do
but I'm still pretty much in the "I am not bright enough to full understand
this" stage.

runagate · Post by **runagate** » Tue May 02, 2006 12:18 am

This thing is so great!

I swear that if you read the manual like 6 times you'll get it.

runagate · Post by **runagate** » Mon May 15, 2006 1:05 am

I stopped by to see if there's anything new going on in the world of Lost Technology?