Hallo, Tim Goetze hat gesagt: // Tim Goetze wrote: Cool++. I still have to try it. BTW: At the evening of your announcement I played a lot with preamp and unmatched in Pd. An unedited, unmastered and unnormalized (turn up the vol) "live" result is now at http://footils.org/snd/bluegrass.ogg But that track's not for everyone, I guess. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__

Hallo, Florian Schmidt hat gesagt: // Florian Schmidt wrote: But your's is a real guitar. ;) I did use a simple pluck~ patch that's available on my site, routed through Tim's plugins and then out. Controlled by my trusted 16 fader midi box... Tim's plugins really create that "Santana" amp feeling. Maybe they are a tiny little bit, well, I don't know the english word, but in german: "krächzig" in the upper frequencies. But not much. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__

Frank Barknecht wrote: be sure to try 'matched' or 'unmatched' when you do, they do make the guitar sound a bit more vivid. i like the cozy, ad-hoc sound on this recording of yours. and that piece surely seems aptly named. :) this pluck~, i can't seem to find it on footils. it does sound like karplus-strong, is it? for those not from *.{de,ch,at}: you'd call a sound 'krächzig' that makes you want to clear your throat. could be the remains of aliasing. a synthesized signal is likely to carry more hi-f content than one from an electric guitar. the preamp adds some moderately strong first few partials (even at low gain settings), they could add some inharmonicity to the sound when folding back. if that is the case, lo-passing into the preamp might help. in fact you can get the plugin to alias audibly with a guitar, too, but you have to crank up the gain all the way and hit just the right note at just the right spot on the g string, and hit it hard. not likely to be audible in a mix though, it's still very faint. one day, given enough time, i might be tempted to eliminate even that. given enough ghz, too, because it'll probably mean 8x oversampling or more poles/longer kernels to the oversampling filters. tim

Hallo, Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote: Ah, sorry, it's not. I've uploaded it here: http://footils.org/pkg/pluck.tgz ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__

Florian Schmidt wrote: yes, the gain is arbitrarily limited. you can simply adjust the port's upper bound in preamp.cc for more. another idea would be to scale before taking exp2() when setting up the sample loop; the curve could indeed do with a little more steepness. in this case, fader adjustments won't suffer as much from coarseness as they do when increasing the upper bound. tell me what worked for you, i'm inclined to implement the scaling method one of these days. the frequency response is mostly due to the oversampling filters; unfortunately i am at a loss for good realtime-compatible design methods for those. it would well be possible to recalculate them (chebyshev prototypes) but that would take quite a few cycles, and knowledge about how to move the ripple/s in a chebyshev design (anyone?). post- (and maybe pre-) EQ is probably more fruitful (steve's set has a 3-way parametric + shelving iirc, i don't use EQ myself). i admit for a complete 'preamp' there should be EQ. otoh i haven't found a good reason to include it if there already are plugins out there that do it as well :) glad you like it, tim

On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 10:49:17PM +0100, Tim Goetze wrote: Have you tried polyphase filters? I've never used them but I've heard they are good for oversampling. Nice plugin BTW, I've noot been able to play it myself (my guitars ill), but the sample recording sounds great. - Steve

me wrote: i feel the need to clarify/correct myself: the filters employed are not chebyshev designs, they were designed the same way as 'unmatched': frequency response given, iteratively approximate the filter. they do a lot better than chebys of the same order, but it's quite impossible to recalculate their coefficients at runtime. if that is demanded, the polyphase design probably wins easily. tim

On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 10:43:17AM +0000, Steve Harris wrote: ^^^^^^^^ You seem to use a very odd definition of 'polyphase filter'. In fact any FIR you like can be turned into a polyphase filter - just interpolate the coefficients in the same way you'd interpolate a signal. -- Fons

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 10:54:58 +0100 (CET) Tim Goetze <tim(a)quitte.de> wrote: Tim, do you have any more info about this filter design procedure? I've currently got a nasty filter design problem that I'm looking for a solution for. Erik -- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ Erik de Castro Lopo nospam(a)mega-nerd.com (Yes it's valid) +-----------------------------------------------------------+ "He who writes the code gets to choose his license, and nobody else gets to complain" -- Linus Torvalds