6 Oct
2011
6 Oct
'11
7:09 a.m.
On Thursday 06 October 2011, at 05.43.20, Jens M Andreasen
<jens.andreasen(a)comhem.se> wrote:
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 09:19 +1300, Jeff McClintock
wrote:
That is true for a linear system - but is a cymbal linear...?
Either way, I don't think re-trig vs new voice is all that important for that
kind of sounds. The major problem is that the human ear is annoyingly good at
finding patterns in apparent randomness, so it's probably more worthwhile to
focus on dynamics and variations, to eliminate that retro sampler feel.
However, consider a single string on a guitar. There, you *specifically* want
each new note to kill any previous note on that string, or it just won't sound
anything like a guitar. Same deal with mono synth style sounds and whatnot.
Re-trig, continous pitch and that sort of things are all about being able to
handle different kinds of sounds and play styles without cumbersome hacks and
workarounds.
Thinking about what you can do with your fingers acting directly on various
physical objects, and trying to express that information digitally might be a
good start. More "mechanical" instruments just limit that freedom a bit.
--
//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate
.--- Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics ---.
| http://consulting.olofson.net http://olofsonarcade.com |
'---------------------------------------------------------------------'
* Support the concept of re-triggering a voice
that's already playing,
this is important for any percussive instrument. E.g. hitting a cymbal
twice in quick succession should not trigger the sound of two cymbals
playing together.
Well, actually it should. The waves generated by the first strike are
unaware of the waves generated by the second strike and will pass
through them as if they did not exist. Compare to dropping two pebbles
in a bucket of water.