Re: [yoshimi-user] midi control, LFO and friends

  • From: Will J Godfrey <WillGodfrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: yoshimi-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:17:08 +0000

On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 02:42:24 +1100
cal <cal@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 23/11/10 23:11, Will J Godfrey wrote:
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 09:38:48 +0100
Jeremy Jongepier<jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [yoshimi-user] eet vor.. oh!
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2010 03:43:36 -0800
From: Jay Capela<jaycapela@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Jeremy Jongepier<jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Mon, 2010-11-22 at 10:12 +0100, Jeremy Jongepier wrote:

I'm a bit busy at the moment (which is very rare) but I'll see what I
can do. Maybe it would be best to focus on the Filter parts of the synth
engines and then the controls besides Filter Q (resonance/bandwidth) and
Filter cutoff. So controls like:
* Frequency (Freq. control of the Filter LFO) !!!
* Depth (Depth control of the Filter LFO)
* Attack (A. val of the Filter Envelope)
* Delay (D. val of the Filter Envelope)
* Release (R.val of the Filter Envelope)

Along the lines with what Jeremy has suggested, I feel that MIDI CC
bindings for the ADSR for the amp and filter envelopes AND LFO params
like freq, depth, start and delay are at the top of my list. Also I
think it would be nifty to be able to change the filter category and
filter type on-the-fly via MIDI CC.

Cheers,
Jay Capela

The following comments are based on what I've actually tried to do or
wanted to
do with hardware synths as well as Yoshimi. Obviously it's all about
personal
preferences!

Bearing in mind we only have 127 controls possible, and that some are
already
used, I'm not sure what priority we should give to these. Also there is some
duplication we can avoid.

One that immediately springs to mind is that if we have full control of LFO
depth (which I'd very much like) couldn't we use that in place of delay?
It's
only on really long notes that this is significant and noticeable (shorter
notes
have been and gone before a delayed LFO comes in), and actually I would much
prefer to be able to *slowly* introduce a delayed LFO - or indeed fade it
out -
rather than have it suddenly chop in. Also if that is done, LFO start phase
becomes irrelevant.


Slowly but surely some of this stuff is starting to penetrate this thick
diseased skull of mine. I'm currently trying to figure if & how the instrument
kit concept affects our ambitions. The LFO params and possibly others of
potential interest are accessed via the instrument's kit item array. For midi
control, only the first kit item is accessible without things getting horribly
convoluted. That's fine when there's just one element in the kit, but beyond
that? And is this even relevant?

I think you have to draw the line somewhere, and delving into a whole kit
becomes a step too far I'd say!

--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.


Other related posts: