Messages

16

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: [Im5] and mix parameters missing from mod matrix

« on: October 25, 2016, 09:36:22 PM »

I first tried to keep reasonable the number of matrix destinations.

The number of sound when you need to modify independentaly each of the 6 mixes through the matrix must not been huge.

IM5 could be usefull though.

I can understand that, though generally (at least for me), the more matrix destinations/sources the better! You could always use the modifier (x10) key to go faster through all the options if you needed.

And yeah, messing with each mix individually isn't too pressing, but I've been experimenting with using PreenFM as a very basic additive synth, with each of the 6 carriers producing a different harmonic, but I am unable to change the volume of the later carriers due to this.

Thanks for reading

17

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / [Im5] and mix parameters missing from mod matrix

« on: October 24, 2016, 04:46:43 AM »

Just noticed that the mod matrix only includes im #1 through #4, missing #5 (don't think any algorithms use im6). It also is missing the later mix parameters, most notable in the additive algo (the one with 6 carriers). Are these destinations not included for technical reasons, or is it that the matrix is based on older code? Thanks

18

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pulse Width Modulation for Square?

« on: October 24, 2016, 02:56:52 AM »

Preenfm2 use only precomputed waveforms for performance reason.
So PWM would not be straightforward to add.

I'm not sure adding waveform that people usually find in "substractive synth" would make it a better FM synth.

I suppose so! Still, allowing variable waveforms could introduce quite a lot of interesting harmonic variations. But I understand it would take a huge amount of effort to implement- Thanks for taking the time to answer

19

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: possible o.s. suggestion> add decay for ops to matrix

« on: October 23, 2016, 11:49:51 PM »

"All operators decay" has been in the matrix destinations since 2.05.
I know i need to update the doc 

I think he's referring to individual operator decay more than all ops? Unless those are in too? I didn't notice them.

20

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / [Feature Request] Adjustable Seq/Arp Length

« on: October 23, 2016, 09:11:27 AM »

Hiya! Been really enjoying my Preenfm so far! As an owner of both the Preenfm and the Shruthi, I have to say that one thing Shruthi does better is it's sequencer implementation. On the shruthi (on the seq page at least), Knob 2 changes seq length, Knob 1 rotates the sequence (wrapping values around, a great feature), Knob 3 lets you navigate steps, and Knob 4 edits the step (could have the knob #s wrong). Whereas here, 2 knobs are taken up managing BPM and gate- while both are good features, they should probably deserve their own page to allow more in-depth sequence editing (perhaps a new page could show gate and bpm settings for both sequences simultaneously, two knobs each?). I think this is definitely worth looking into, since currently there is no way to have a sequence in any time signature other than 4/4, unless I am missing something drastically! I wanna make an FM waltz

Thanks again for the wonderful machine Xavier, I hope you don't take all my silly suggestions as demanding / rude or mean-spirited, I am just excited to see the preenfm be the best it can be, and want to help ^.^

21

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: possible o.s. suggestion> add decay for ops to matrix

« on: October 23, 2016, 05:20:02 AM »

Seconding this idea! Would be super useful

22

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Pulse Width Modulation for Square?

« on: October 22, 2016, 04:20:22 AM »

Just a silly crazy idea, but I imagine that doing PWM on a square wave in FM-world could be neat. What do you think? Is it feasible?

23

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Through-Zero FM?

« on: October 19, 2016, 07:47:21 PM »

Fortunately all FM synth don't sound like their "Not through zero" examples.

I don't know how that would translate to digital world. I would have to see the maths behind that.

From what I understand, it just watches for whenever the modulator's signal goes under 0 (when the carrier should stop), and then sends the absolute value of the modulator to the carrier, but also tells the carrier to reverse it's waveform. Not sure on implementation. I'm not super math-saavy, but this paper maybe explains a bit more than I could: http://electronotes.netfirms.com/EN206.pdf

Some more implementation ideas are here I think: https://www.muffwiggler.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8027&highlight=zero

A super CPU heavy idea I thought of is adding a simple square wave oscillator for each operator which can send the "time to reverse" message at the proper time.

Sorry, I don't wanna seem greedy and I wish I had more information, but I was just curious what you would think of it! Might be worth experimenting, hehe. Thanks again

24

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Through-Zero FM?

« on: October 17, 2016, 05:03:14 AM »

Hello! Thankyou Xavier for the wonderful project.

I wanted to ask a question about the FM implementation PreenFM2 uses.

Is the algorithm "through zero" FM, or traditional? In case you don't know, through-zero FM continues modulation even after the modulator goes into negative side of it's wave (i.e. under the DC point / "0"), reversing the carrier's wave to simulate "negative frequency". It has a much fuller tone than traditional FM: Here is a video explaining it better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Eo_P6iW-0

If it isn't implemented, would you consider adding it in the future? It would be a very unique selling point, since very few FM synths are capable of this (none that aren't modular, as far as I know!). Not sure how hard it is to implement though.

Thanks for taking the time to read, keep up the great work