waldorf Osc sync???
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Tennessee, USA
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Tennessee, USA
- Contact:
if you sort thru the available wavetables, you will come accross numerous ones which are synced oscillator sounds. If you need a reference chart, I made one and upped it to the files section of the Pulsar-Scope List serve - groups@yahoo.com I find it really handy to have next on hand to find particular settings of the Waldorph Oscs. Should I up this thing to planetz somewhere too?
Interesting idea, but I'm not sure how that would work. Let me explain why I'm having trouble with "sync" on a wavetable oscillator:
Waldorf uses half-cycle waves for each wave in the wavetable, and inverts them to get the other half. The wavetables in the uWaveXT each have I believe 64 waves, and the Waldorf wavetable oscillators have exactly have that, so only 32 waves. You can get some awesome evolving sounds by sweeping through the wavetable with an LFO.
In fact, sweeping the table fast enough will cause distortions as the wavetable osc attempts to keep up with the rate at which you're sweeping it -- causing it to jump to the next wave in the wave table without finishing the wave it's currently playing!
Now, because of the inversion to obtain the "other half" of the wave and the fact that each "oscillation" is in fact controlled externally via an LFO or envelope, etc, I'm not sure sync would make sense. Does that satisfy your question?
So, you could use the same source you're using to sweep the wavetable to control the other oscillator to get them to sync... Try sweeping the second wavetable with the NEGATIVE amount of LFO1, and the first with a POSITIVE amount of LFO one so that the sweeps go in opposite directions.
One nice advantage the Waldorf Osc have over the uWaveXT itself, is that you can have more than one wavetable loaded... right? On the uWave, you can only have one distinct wavetable at once.
Waldorf uses half-cycle waves for each wave in the wavetable, and inverts them to get the other half. The wavetables in the uWaveXT each have I believe 64 waves, and the Waldorf wavetable oscillators have exactly have that, so only 32 waves. You can get some awesome evolving sounds by sweeping through the wavetable with an LFO.
In fact, sweeping the table fast enough will cause distortions as the wavetable osc attempts to keep up with the rate at which you're sweeping it -- causing it to jump to the next wave in the wave table without finishing the wave it's currently playing!
Now, because of the inversion to obtain the "other half" of the wave and the fact that each "oscillation" is in fact controlled externally via an LFO or envelope, etc, I'm not sure sync would make sense. Does that satisfy your question?
So, you could use the same source you're using to sweep the wavetable to control the other oscillator to get them to sync... Try sweeping the second wavetable with the NEGATIVE amount of LFO1, and the first with a POSITIVE amount of LFO one so that the sweeps go in opposite directions.
One nice advantage the Waldorf Osc have over the uWaveXT itself, is that you can have more than one wavetable loaded... right? On the uWave, you can only have one distinct wavetable at once.
thanx for the response... i'll try what u are suggesting...
well i worked a modular patch based on the softsync method from nord modular and i changed the synced oscillator with a waldorf wavetable providing frequensy control from a modulated sync out signal from a master sync oscillator... i haven't finished it but i beleive that i am close (i have uncontrollable formants)
well i worked a modular patch based on the softsync method from nord modular and i changed the synced oscillator with a waldorf wavetable providing frequensy control from a modulated sync out signal from a master sync oscillator... i haven't finished it but i beleive that i am close (i have uncontrollable formants)
I've temporarily uploaded a Waldorf Sync patch to my site, get it at http://www.jrrshop.com/Eric/Waldorf_Sync.mdl; I'll try to leave it up till Tuesday. While it's true that you can't use the Waldorf Osc has a sync slave, using it as sync master is a uniquely different alternative to the other sync master oscillators.
-Eric Dahlberg
-Eric Dahlberg
Visual Stimulation...<br>
<img src=http://www.geekporn.org/pulsar/waldorf_sync.jpg>
Binary Modularotica...<br><a href=http://www.geekporn.org/pulsar/waldorf_ ... ownload</a>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-06-18 08:42 ]</font>
<img src=http://www.geekporn.org/pulsar/waldorf_sync.jpg>
Binary Modularotica...<br><a href=http://www.geekporn.org/pulsar/waldorf_ ... ownload</a>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: subhuman on 2001-06-18 08:42 ]</font>
I don't want to waste space in the files area for just a silly little demonstration patch, though I could go ahead & really make something out of it if enough people request it. Honestly, there are a lot of patches on Planetz that ought to be taken down (including some of my own) & I've no intention to add to the clutter.
- John Cooper
- Moderator
- Posts: 1182
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Planet Z
- Contact:
Hey eric,
I'm about to embark on the house-cleaning of the site, but i'm wondering how to decide what to take down and what to leave up. It's gonna be rough. Ultimately what i'd like to do is have all the patch/device developers tell me which ones to leave up, and if they don't tell me, then they get taken down. But i know that some of the developers are no longer around and/or no longer active, and i'd hate to take down legitimately cool stuff.
we'll figure something out.
-john
I'm about to embark on the house-cleaning of the site, but i'm wondering how to decide what to take down and what to leave up. It's gonna be rough. Ultimately what i'd like to do is have all the patch/device developers tell me which ones to leave up, and if they don't tell me, then they get taken down. But i know that some of the developers are no longer around and/or no longer active, and i'd hate to take down legitimately cool stuff.
we'll figure something out.
-john
How about an mp3.com-style rating system like I mentioned earlier? That way what stays up would be decided on by the users & the best patches would always get the most attention (by being on top of the list).
I'd appreciate if you'd get rid of my "Midi Volume Fader-Stereo & Mono" patch, I only put it up to show people how to get around the old master faders' zipper problem. I still use it, of course, since it's cleaner than the BM v2b.
I'd appreciate if you'd get rid of my "Midi Volume Fader-Stereo & Mono" patch, I only put it up to show people how to get around the old master faders' zipper problem. I still use it, of course, since it's cleaner than the BM v2b.
- John Cooper
- Moderator
- Posts: 1182
- Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Planet Z
- Contact:
yep, i'm implementing topic-rating, and you'll be able to sort the list by rating.On 2001-06-19 03:50, Peezahj wrote:
How about an mp3.com-style rating system like I mentioned earlier? That way what stays up would be decided on by the users & the best patches would always get the most attention (by being on top of the list).
ok, done.I'd appreciate if you'd get rid of my "Midi Volume Fader-Stereo & Mono" patch
thanks as always for the suggestions and help
-john