the resonance is touchy on that thing, still trying to figure out what to do about it, maybe i need to decrease the range of the control i use to adjust it from 0 to 10 or 4 or whatever it is to 0 - 1 or 2. also the frequency adjustment is not as forgiving on the high end as the other filters i use. its possible i'm doing something different with the modulations due to snapshot converting audio rate modulations which are usually not very fast anyways . sounds great and controls in demo are pretty dang close to the ones in silicon
The resonant frequency is a signal input - you shouldn't have to use snapshot~ to convert that to a message.
On reading this, it seems to me I should make the "resonance" a separate signal input too. (It wasn't voltage controlled on the original module, but that's no reason not to allow it now :)
cheers M
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:55:41AM -0500, Billy Stiltner wrote:
the resonance is touchy on that thing, still trying to figure out what to do about it, maybe i need to decrease the range of the control i use to adjust it from 0 to 10 or 4 or whatever it is to 0 - 1 or 2. also the frequency adjustment is not as forgiving on the high end as the other filters i use. its possible i'm doing something different with the modulations due to snapshot converting audio rate modulations which are usually not very fast anyways . sounds great and controls in demo are pretty dang close to the ones in silicon
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
the q is what I meant I guess. sometimes I use lfo or envelope to modulate the q I think I probably just need to reduce the range of my control down to a safe level to keep the thing from squalling at high frequencies. :)
On 2/13/15, Miller Puckette msp@ucsd.edu wrote:
The resonant frequency is a signal input - you shouldn't have to use snapshot~ to convert that to a message.
On reading this, it seems to me I should make the "resonance" a separate signal input too. (It wasn't voltage controlled on the original module, but
that's no reason not to allow it now :)
cheers M
Finally got around to trying the new bob~ filter. Works really really great. I found that my keyboard (midi note) scaling of frequency logic was causing the frequency to go way too high when modulating thefilter frequency so I can use a kb tracking value of < 1 and the squelching doesn't happen. The audio rate q is great. My favorite way to use it is with 2 lfos, one lfo modulating the frequency of the other lfo and the other modulating the filter q. This along with an envelope makes the synth sound as if it's a stratocaster connected to a mashal amp and making wobbly feedback sounds when the filter starts ringing. Besides that it's a really awesome moog emulator. On another note I removed all the IEM filter bank and tracked down some excess midi notein messages, my synth now is playable live with the fractal sequencer as well as qtractor sequencing without glitching. Take note Ed Kelly. I noticed after a fresh install of ubuntu studio on a fresh machine 64 bit that the IEMlib was missing lots of objects, so I looked on my old laptop and seen a folder in pdextended/ext that I had named "deletethis" with note that iemcot4~ was not actually iemcot4! . I remembered I had to compile the 64 bit iemlib myself and had to fudge in some of the functions. So instead of copying over my compiled iemlib , I just erased my iemlib filter bank. it was kinda monstrouswith way too many objects. 2 sets of 9 filters for each of the 6 voices per synth. only 1 filter out of the 9 was active per bank but there were all those control objects that were used to select and turn off the inactive filters. I'm not sure why but my DSP cookbook filters implemented in fexp~ sound pretty good to be converted from c code I wrote like in 1998. I guess they are a bit processor hungry not sure how much better they would be as an external instead of in an fexpr~. Anyways great job on the bob~ and on the new pd.
-
Billy Stiltner -
Miller Puckette