Messages

76

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: March 06, 2021, 04:21:39 PM »

I just noticed a bug (when using 2.20w and the current version of the editor)... when I push a patch from the editor, it "zeros" out the voices in the PFM2. regardless of the voice setting in the editor.


If I turn the voice knob in the editor the number of voices is correct, its just when I press "push."

Not sure if its an editor bug, or a PFM2 bug. However, this behavior does not exist at PFM2 2.20u.

77

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: March 06, 2021, 03:32:57 PM »

I checked 2.20w out. CC13 and CC14 work as described.

I checked out the display after sending presets from the editor and that seems to work as well. (no weird names all over the display)

Good work.

78

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: March 03, 2021, 06:37:13 AM »

@vurt I didn't realize you meant the gain in the filter section. I thought you had meant the volume knob.

I always set gain to less than 1.0 (usually at 0.85 or so), as I had interpreted 1.0 as full gain to avoid any overdrive that I did not intend.

79

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: March 02, 2021, 04:39:44 AM »

@vurt do the patches that distort use a particular algorithm? Also does the volume knob have to be at full, or does it also distort on less than max?

Are the patches short envelope times or long envelopes (like a pad)?

I run my PFM2 at maybe 3/4 max volume. I have not noticed any distortion. but maybe I just lucked out.

80

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: legato on short sounds

« on: February 27, 2021, 01:34:46 PM »

ok, makes sense. Thanks.

81

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 26, 2021, 06:29:08 PM »

On my unit "spread" seems to affect the stereo field. I've mostly been doing unison using 3 or 4 voices max.

Looking at the code, it definitely effects the pan.
for example in Timbre.cpp:
float opPanInc = 2.0f / numberOfCarrierOp * params.engine2.unisonSpread;


Regarding the amplitude ratio, sounds like a cool idea. Might you have a sound example from another synth?

82

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 26, 2021, 03:37:05 PM »

@ solipsvs are you suggesting using a CC or a mod destination for unison detune.

83

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / legato on short sounds

« on: February 24, 2021, 02:22:25 AM »

Now that I'm making and playing with unison sounds, I think I have a programming question regarding envelopes and mono sounds and legato playing style:

When I make short sounds (short envelopes, like a pluck or a bass) that are mono (e.g., either 1 voice or unison) when I hold down a first key, for example C3, then while the first key is still held down the envelope ends (intentionally), I then press the next key, for example C4, ( all the while C3 is still held down), and the pressing of the second key (C4) does not re-trigger the envelope. (The notes I used here are for example only and this holds true of any notes, including ones not in my example.)

I have to release the first note (C3) before pressing a second key to get the second key to sound.

So, the question is, how do I have to set the envelope to allow the triggering of the 2nd key press before the note off of the first key press? or is there another setting I may be missing.

I noted this as an issue also when playing solo sound lead lines in a legato style. If I play the second key to fast (before note off of the first note), I get no sound from that second key press even though the amplitude envelope has ended.

84

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 22, 2021, 07:33:47 PM »

I meant replaced. e.g.: { .11f, .125f, .25f, .53f, .03f, .19f, .89f, 0.23f, .71f, .19f, .31f, .43f, .59f, .97f };


Let me try these new values out:
{ .37f, .11f, .495f, .53f, .03f, .19f, .89f, 0.23f, .71f, .19f, .31f, .43f, .59f, .97f };

... (a few min later)...

I compiled your new values and they also sound good (slightly different but very good). { .37f, .11f, .495f, .53f, .03f, .19f, .89f, 0.23f, .71f, .19f, .31f, .43f, .59f, .97f }


edit: I tried at 3 voices and at 14 voices and at 14 voices it sounds dead on the same for either array. at 3 voices there are some subtle differences but both arrays above sound good.

85

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 22, 2021, 06:33:52 PM »

Thanks.

I tested it and it works.

Then I shifted the 2nd and 3rd unison voice to .125f and .25f and it makes an improvement.
 
I suggest making this change.

86

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 22, 2021, 02:30:50 PM »

@Xavier

Before tweaking the code I decided to approach this in a semi organized manner. I am going to start with an initial simple patch with nothing special going on and record 3 unison voices and 9 unison voices at the same detune settings before and after making any  code changes.

I started a new preset, saw wave for OP 1, algorithm 1. No modulation of any sort.

... (a few min later) ...

However, I'm not sure the last build (2.20u) is shifting the phase of any of the unison voices when detune is set to a positive value.

I set Detune to any value and it sounds the same for both + values as - values of Detune. For example +0.12 and -0.12. prior to making any changes. Also, the waveforms look identical between the + and - value, which indicated that something is not happening. Based on the waveform, it looks like everything is still starting at a phase of zero regardless of setting.

I then changed the first few values in timbre.cpp as discussed above, and the sound and recorded waveform are still identical to the sound and look of the original values. (I.e., I think everything is still starting at phase=0.)

Any ideas?

Edit: Also, can anyone else confirm if they are getting the same results with a positive and a negative detune value?

87

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 22, 2021, 04:05:55 AM »

@Xavier very cool. I really like the option of the +1 and -1 range like you implemented.

Would it be possible for you to set unison voices 2 and 3 to close to (but not exactly) 90 degrees and 45 degrees respectively before you finalize the OS? I've been playing in audacity with offsetting the phase of detuned voices, and the 2nd and 3rd unison voices set to those values (near 90 and near 45) seems to sound nice.


Or, can you let me know what values to change the line below to- to try this out? (I'll compile it on  my end)
           float copyPhase[] = { .11f, .37f, .67f, .53f, .03f, .19f, .89f, 0.23f, .71f, .19f, .31f, .43f, .59f, .97f };

I'm assuming I should play with changing the .37f and the .67f.
Are those values in radians? What values would give me 45 degrees (or so) and 90 degrees (or so).

88

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 19, 2021, 02:13:24 PM »

Thanks. Good samples for the explanation.
 
The random start phase sample you posted does sound better.

Looking at the difference in waveforms in an editor, one can see that the in-phase sample has distinct peaks, whereas the random phase one has no discernible peaks.

I'm assuming each unison voice in serum starts at a random phase, e.g., not the pairs of unison voices (assuming an odd number of unison voices).

89

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: My PreenFM2 demo

« on: February 19, 2021, 02:41:47 AM »

@vurt
Good point regarding sharing patches. I've been making patches and I will isolate the ones that don't use custom waveforms so I can share them. Or I may make a copy of the ones that use custom waveforms and tweak them using the standard waveforms.

I really enjoyed your soundcloud example. 

90

preenfm2 and preenfm3 / Re: Pfm2 : unison discussion

« on: February 19, 2021, 02:23:40 AM »

@solipsvs I believe this just sounds like typical unison behavior. Also, we may be making different types of sounds.
The analog synths that I have that can do unison have this phasing sound to it. I also think my Access Virus (digital synth) has this effect when using unison. Personally I like it. What is an example of a synth where you don't hear the phasing when using unison? Would you mind posting a sample? I would love to compare. I'm very much into new sounds.

However, even if the unison voices are out of phase, there will still be phasing because there is a phase difference between the voices. The reason unison sounds stick out is because of the beating.

Some suggestions for reducing the phasing during sound design are:
1) use more unison voices
2) don't do unison on low frequency sounds
3) try different waveforms. for example unison on a saw sounds is less likely to have this phasing than with a sine wave