On 26/02/2014, Risto Holopainen <rist...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Now, for my part, I find soft sync much more useful. I don't know what > attempts there have been to do soft sync in digital oscillators, if anyone > knows I'd be interested.
Nobody agrees on whether soft sync is "knock the waveform into reverse" (the Alesis Ion did that, and within the limitations of Alesis' sync implementation generally it did sound interesting) or "only sync if the slave is within a threshold", which is what your samples sound like (I don't know if any synth does that). But you'd think both would be easy (once you've conquered the bandlimiting problem) on a phase-accumulator based synth: the first example negates the phase increment on sync; and the second only resets the slave's phase if it's lower than the threshold (where both are fractions), so turn the threshold up to 100% and it becomes hard sync. But both require master and slave to have independent phase accumulators, and as rbj mentions it's much easier in digital land to simply derive the slave's phase straight from the master's. -- dupswapdrop -- the music-dsp mailing list and website: subscription info, FAQ, source code archive, list archive, book reviews, dsp links http://music.columbia.edu/cmc/music-dsp http://music.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
