Author Topic: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic  (Read 1181 times)

kuzma_p

  • Team Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Paraphonic vs Polyphonic
« on: August 17, 2015, 10:15:28 AM »
Regarding paraphonic matrix was it made so because of lack of resources? It could be a huge drawback for someone i guess. Everyone is used to per-voice modulations these days IMO. For example global pitch modulation sounds strange and cheap a bit compared to per-voice vibrato which gives you a proper rich tones usually. Yeah you can do vibrato through modulation applied to 1Hz OP but..
Even my tx81z has per-voice LFO i quess (i can be wrong here though)
Filter could be still paraphonic though.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2015, 09:39:36 PM by Xavier »

Xavier

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1171
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic
« Reply #1 on: August 17, 2015, 11:59:01 AM »
It's interesting but it's note related to 1.07 firmware so i've split this post.

Preenfm1 & 2 have always been like this by design for resource reason.
Real polyphony would require a big refactor and reduce the number of available voices.


kuzma_p

  • Team Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic
« Reply #2 on: August 17, 2015, 12:18:53 PM »
Yeah i suspected this when i was messing with LFOs some time ago. It became more evident after you introduced Note scaling feature.
I can live with this though. But obviously i would not mind having polyphonic matrix with reduced voice number since it will sound more organic for me.

Xavier

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1171
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2015, 11:56:53 PM »
In fact it was not a so big refactoring. 
I didn't expect to have a sounding result in one evening.
I don't know how stable it is, but it sounds... And i agree per voice LFO sounds better  :D
Real polyphonic firmware first try
. Targeting filter frequency in the matrix needs more work
. Don't know if this firmware can handle as many voices as the other one in worst case situation
. Destination matrix broken : gate, Att*, Rel*....

But with that i need a second "Note" matrix source.  ;)
One fore IM* : to limit high frequency alilasing
One for Pan* : to have a stero image over the keyboard. Low note on the left, hight more on the right.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2015, 08:59:30 AM by Xavier »

martindunne

  • Team Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic (an other beta firmware included)
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2015, 01:30:37 AM »
this sounds great, nice work:)

Xavier

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1171
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic (an other beta firmware included)
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2015, 08:58:16 AM »

Thanks  :)
I could not prevent from fixing the Modwheell, Pitchbend (and other midi problem) problem before going to work :

Polyponic LFO firmware 1.99b

kuzma_p

  • Team Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic (an other beta firmware included)
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2015, 10:38:40 AM »
Awesome! Gonna test it today!

clément

  • Team Member
  • **
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
    • http://clementmarion.be
Re: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic (an other beta firmware included)
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2015, 11:14:22 AM »
Nice!

kuzma_p

  • Team Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
    • View Profile
Re: Paraphonic vs Polyphonic (firmware 1.07beta2+polyphony)
« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2015, 11:53:48 PM »
Didn't delved deep. But it sounds pretty organic now. Nice!
Did not faced with any problem yet.
https://clyp.it/b330ub3y