Hi, All.
Playing with C01.nyquist.pd in the documentation, it occurred to me that I can satisfy myself experimentally that I have overcome my foldover problems just by implementing a sweep of the fundamental frequency and listening for swoops of folded over partials heading in the opposite direction. If all the partials head in the same direction, it must be good enough.
Is that correct? Are there any gotchas that I haven't thought of?
Thanks for reading.
Cheers, David
If it sounds good enough for your ears, then it must be right!!!!! D.
David F. Place wrote:
Hi, All.
Playing with C01.nyquist.pd in the documentation, it occurred to me that I can satisfy myself experimentally that I have overcome my foldover problems just by implementing a sweep of the fundamental frequency and listening for swoops of folded over partials heading in the opposite direction. If all the partials head in the same direction, it must be good enough.
Is that correct? Are there any gotchas that I haven't thought of?
That is good news and bad news. The bad news is that I still hear the annoying noise that I thought was due to foldover. It must be something else, but I have no idea what.
On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 17:05 +0100, Derek Holzer wrote:
If it sounds good enough for your ears, then it must be right!!!!! D.
David F. Place wrote:
Hi, All.
Playing with C01.nyquist.pd in the documentation, it occurred to me that I can satisfy myself experimentally that I have overcome my foldover problems just by implementing a sweep of the fundamental frequency and listening for swoops of folded over partials heading in the opposite direction. If all the partials head in the same direction, it must be good enough.
Is that correct? Are there any gotchas that I haven't thought of?
-
David F. Place -
Derek Holzer