| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1760.1 | Probably don't need more than a few filtres and oscillators | MENTOR::REG | a little risc averse | Mon Nov 07 1988 14:50 | 10 |
|
I had been thinking along these lines last friday night.
I had the simple idea of a number of tones to represent the instrument's
(almost any acoustic instrument) "box" at its resonant frequency(s).
These would be triggered, reinforced and continued by sounding harmonics
of their frequencies. Presumably one could stimulate buzz and rattle
emulators in the same sort of way :-^)
R
|
| 1760.2 | | SALSA::MOELLER | DEC's hip to the Standards Thing ! | Mon Nov 07 1988 15:27 | 22 |
| < Note 1760.1 by MENTOR::REG "a little risc averse" >
> I had the simple idea of a number of tones to represent the instrument's
> (almost any acoustic instrument) "box" at its resonant frequency(s).
^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Two concepts here.. mine, generating the overtone series specifically
for a grand piano, in stereo, generated by the same MIDI info, notes
and pedalling, sent to the actual grand piano SGU.
Reg, yours is more like a 'formant' generator.. it would actually
need to be a software-driven stereo EQ unit.. choose SOLOVIOLIN
setting, and it would would not need to generate actual overtone
series, but intelligently impose characteristic violin-body formant
frequency EQ on the output of your OTHER SGU (sampler), actually
playing the violin sound.
> These would be triggered, reinforced and continued by sounding harmonics
> of their frequencies.
No, I don't believe the 'box' imposes harmonics that would need
to be generated, but rather, a complex EQ curve.
karl (90�F here yesterday)
|
| 1760.3 | | STROKR::DEHAHN | | Mon Nov 07 1988 16:42 | 8 |
|
This sounds like a great ida. However, it sounds like you want to
store a lot of harmonics. Unless you do some kind of fancy encoding,
it's gonna mean a lot of memory. At ~$40/Mbit, that could add up
pretty fast.
CdH
|
| 1760.4 | U try this, k? | DYO780::SCHAFER | Brad - back in Ohio. | Mon Nov 07 1988 16:54 | 12 |
| Is this a bit more "possible" now that cheap pgmable reverbs have come
out - especially the multi-FX ones? The new Alesis thingie allows you
to stack FX and control them via MIDI controllers in realtime.
Perhaps setup as follows: MFX using verb 1 (on) and verb 2 (off) -
assign KX controller to send MIDI value - map sustain on to verb 2
level max (which is a bigger room than verb 1), sustain off to verb 2
level off.
Maybe?
-b (we hadda incha snow last night 8-)
|
| 1760.5 | yeah well *I* still swim outside at night! | SALSA::MOELLER | DEC's hip to the Standards Thing ! | Mon Nov 07 1988 18:15 | 15 |
| < Note 1760.4 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad - back in Ohio." >
> -< U try this, k? >-
>The new Alesis thingie allows you
> to stack FX and control them via MIDI controllers in realtime.
> Perhaps setup as follows: MFX using verb 1 (on) and verb 2 (off) -
> assign KX controller to send MIDI value - map sustain on to verb 2
> level max (which is a bigger room than verb 1), sustain off to verb 2
> level off.
I DID try this using Performer on the Mac, found a semiautomated
way to replace the #64 pedal events in a spare track with MIDIverb
patch changes. Using ONE MIDIverb.. when it switched from large
room to small room (#64 off), there was a 'snap' as the 'big' algorithm
quit.
|
| 1760.6 | So do I (have since I was 7 (oneupmanship rules!)) | GLORY::SCHAFER | Brad - banished to Michigan. | Tue Nov 08 1988 10:31 | 9 |
| I remember your problems with snap - have you tried this with a
MIDIverb II? Also, with a multi-FX unit, the snap will *probably* not
be a factor, since you won't be switching patches per se, but rather
munging a controller value somewhere.
Can you tell Performer to map #64 off to "scale controlller x from 100
- 0 over delta time"?
-b
|
| 1760.7 | | CANYON::MOELLER | | Wed Nov 09 1988 12:14 | 5 |
| < Note 1760.6 by GLORY::SCHAFER "Brad - banished to Michigan." >
> Can you tell Performer to map #64 off to "scale controlller x from 100
> - 0 over delta time"?
nope.
|
| 1760.8 | Oh well. | DYO780::SCHAFER | Brad - back in Ohio. | Wed Nov 09 1988 12:17 | 5 |
| Hmmm - then about all you can hope for is a FX box that does silent
changes from mute -> big room -> mute. I might have a go in a few
minutes.
-b
|
| 1760.9 | Where there's a will... | DYO780::SCHAFER | Brad - back in Ohio. | Wed Nov 09 1988 12:37 | 9 |
| Just tried doing this with a MIDIverb II ... patch change is quiet as a
mouse. Of course, going from a very small room to a very large room
results in a marked difference in ambience.
Couldn't figure out in a short time how to force the KX to map the
pedal to both sustain on/off and use-patch-22/use-patch-11. Surely it
can be done ...
-b
|
| 1760.10 | hey, I have two feet, I'll buy another pedal! | SALSA::MOELLER | Proton Spin Memory support | Wed Nov 09 1988 16:39 | 14 |
| < Note 1760.9 by DYO780::SCHAFER "Brad - back in Ohio." >
> Just tried doing this with a MIDIverb II ... patch change is quiet as a
> mouse. Of course, going from a very small room to a very large room
> results in a marked difference in ambience.
> Couldn't figure out in a short time how to force the KX to map the
> pedal to both sustain on/off and use-patch-22/use-patch-11.
^^^^
||||
that was MY problem.. once you remap the controller to do this
patch switch, assuming you can, then it's no longer doing #64 on/off!!!
karl, from his limping DECwindows 4MB VS2000
|
| 1760.11 | My friends call me pontoon shoes. | DYO780::SCHAFER | Brad - back in Ohio. | Wed Nov 09 1988 16:51 | 8 |
| This is really going down a rathole ...
My OB-Xa won't respond to MIDI sustain, so I have its sustain pedal
taped beside my KX sustain pedal. Fortunately, I have wide feet...
I'll try this tonight and see what I can come up with.
-b
|