> > Does continuous control mean continuous sound?
>
> No, because one of the controls is often gate or amplitude.
But that is the result of some other control - by default, these things are
always on, they may be gated or muted, but they are oscillating.
> (Analogue) monosynths do not have in
On Thursday 16 January 2003 18.39, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
[...]
> 2. A poly synth. Here normally 'a new note is a new note', and
> things like the effect described above are not possible because
> the synth does not know the relations between the existing set
> of notes and any new ones. Anther exa
On Thursday 16 January 2003 12.09, Steve Harris wrote:
[...]
> > 2) continuous control - this includes things like a violin, which
> > receives streams of parameters. This gets a VVID for each new
> > voice. If you want glissando, you would tell the violin synth
> > that fact, and it would handle
The whole discussion about VVIDs has become a rather complicated
web of opinions and examples that sometimes are understood, and
sometimes not. This is how I see it.
Why we need explicit VVIDs.
With MIDI, you can have
1. A mono synth. If there is any relation between a new note
and another one,
On Thursday 16 January 2003 01.14, Tim Hockin wrote:
[...]
> > The only problem I have with it is that it's completely
> > irrelevant to continous control synths - but they can just ignore
> > it, or not have the control at all.
>
> Does continuous control mean continuous sound?
No. A synth has to
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 04:14:23 -0800, Tim Hockin wrote:
> I'm breaking these into two emails for the two subjects. I'm replying to
> each subject in big reply - so you can see the evolution of my position :)
>
> *** From: David Olofson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > The trigger is a virtual control
I'm breaking these into two emails for the two subjects. I'm replying to
each subject in big reply - so you can see the evolution of my position :)
*** From: David Olofson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > The trigger is a virtual control which really just says whether the
> > voice is on or not. You set
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 11:29:20PM +0100, David Olofson wrote:
>
> Because that's just the way it is, even if you can "stretch" the
> concept slightly. Ever implemented a MIDI synth?
In fact I did :-)
>
> > If you doubt, feel free to come over to my studio and hear my AKAI
> > sampler play mu
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 21.56, Frank van de Pol wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 01:07:30PM +0100, David Olofson wrote:
>
>
> > With MIDI, this is obvious, since VVID == note pitch. It's not
> > that easy with our protocol, and I don't think it's a good idea
> > to turn a vital feature like t
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 01:07:30PM +0100, David Olofson wrote:
>
> With MIDI, this is obvious, since VVID == note pitch. It's not that
> easy with our protocol, and I don't think it's a good idea to turn a
> vital feature like this into something that synths will have to
> implement through arb
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 18.10, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 03:43:52 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > Another observation:
> >
> > There are two ways you could start notes on a monophonic synth:
> > 1. Use the same VVID for all notes
> > 2. Use a new VVID for each note.
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 03:43:52 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> Another observation:
>
> There are two ways you could start notes on a monophonic synth:
> 1. Use the same VVID for all notes
> 2. Use a new VVID for each note.
I dont think that a (typical) monosynth should have or use VV
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 16.54, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> Hi all. I joined the list today, and have been following the
> vivid discussion on VVIDs with interest.
Welcome! :-)
[...polyphony, glisando, reusing VVIDs etc...]
> One thing you can't express with (polyhonic) MIDI is the following
>
Hi all. I joined the list today, and have been following the
vivid discussion on VVIDs with interest. On the whole, I agree
with David Olofson. There are a number of limitations in the
MIDI protocol and it should not be the model for any new API.
David Olofson writes:
> On Wednesday 15 January
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 15.28, David Olofson wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 January 2003 14.46, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > I don't follow you at all - a new note is a new note. If your
> > > instrument has a glissando control, use it. It does the right
> > > thing. Each new note gets a new VVID.
>
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 14.46, Steve Harris wrote:
[...]
> > > Starting a new note on a VVID when a previous note is still in
> > > the release phase would cause a glisando, while if the VVID has
> > > no playing voice, one would be activated and started as needed
> > > to play a new note. The
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 01:42:27 -0800, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > This is very "anti modular synth". NOTE/VOICE/GATE is a control type
> > hint. I see no reason to imply that it can only be used for a certain
> > kind of controls, since it's really just a "name" used by users
> > and/or hosts to mat
On Wednesday 15 January 2003 10.42, Tim Hockin wrote:
> > [Lost touch with the list, so I'm trying to catch up here... I
> > did notice that gardena.net is gone - but I forgot that I was
> > using [EMAIL PROTECTED] for this list! *heh*]
>
> Woops! Welcome back!
Well, thanks. :-)
[...]
> > The e
> [Lost touch with the list, so I'm trying to catch up here... I did
> notice that gardena.net is gone - but I forgot that I was using
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] for this list! *heh*]
Woops! Welcome back!
> > If flags are standardized, it can. Int32: 0 = unused, +ve = plugin
> > owned, -ve = special
[Lost touch with the list, so I'm trying to catch up here... I did
notice that gardena.net is gone - but I forgot that I was using
[EMAIL PROTECTED] for this list! *heh*]
> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] more on XAP Virtual Voice ID system
> From: Tim Hockin (thockin_AT_hockin.org)
> Date: Fri J
20 matches
Mail list logo
