1 Apr
2016
1 Apr
'16
3:09 a.m.
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 00:22:14 +0100
Will Godfrey <willgodfrey(a)musically.me.uk> wrote:
As part of our quest for the best possible sound we
are planning an
enhancement that passes bits through a grading process (the well
known 'Enharmonic Bit Comparator' - version 33)* thus ensuring that
any bit asymmetry is removed.
He he. On the contrary, asymmetry would be Good IMHO.
Finally, there is the open-source BitShine engine
(BS). This
'clarifies' individual zeroes and ones passing through it, making
them sharper, ...
There must be something behind coming up with 'rich' synth algorithms
that is not so simple. I have yet to hear one Linux Open Source synth
that sounds like a Linux commercial one.
If it was only time, then give an Open Source project 5 years and
the guys should come up progressively with something that starts
sounding like Hive, at the same time making it possible for others to
make sound patches easily by tweaking interface parameters. I do not
pretend to know all Linux Open Source synths although I have tried a
few. Nor do I know much about synth sound structures. While in their
own genre, one like Yoshimi/Zynaddsubfx have their own niche, the
multi-dimensional dare I say aspect of the sounds, the intricate
weaving that caresses the ears that mainstream competes for, leaves to
be desired.
This is why I think that there's more to these algorithms than just
throwing time at them (to state it simple). And that same reason might
be why that when something is found, it goes closed source. If not, if
it was relatively easy, there would be, for instance, serious Diva
competitors in the Open Source. Or even the free Podolski or
Zebralette.
Cheers.