<div dir="ltr">Hello,<div>Thank you Donald for the interesting read! </div><div>I've been wondering: is there a known relationship between an arbitrary waveform's spectrum and its integral/derivative's? Are all integral waveforms "mellow" versions of their derivatives?<br></div><div><br></div><div>I've asked recently on another DSP mailing list but did not get any answer. It might be very simple maths...</div><div> -m</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:45 PM, David G Dixon <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dixon@mail.ubc.ca" target="_blank">dixon@mail.ubc.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">The Rubicon (Intellijel eurorack) has double-frequency saws as a standard<br>
output. It also has a "sigmoid" wave (a saw put through a sine-shaper<br>
instead of a triangle), and a double-frequency sigmoid. I don't know of any<br>
other "commercial" VCOs with these waveforms. Another nice one is the<br>
"zigzag" wave, which is really just the sum of triangle and square. This<br>
waveform is the control signal for the core comparator in my VCO designs,<br>
and I just brought it out through a buffer to an output jack.<br>
<br>
One thing I'm wondering about lately is the Minimoog "sawtooth" which looks<br>
more like a shark-fin. What does the spectrum look like for that waveform?<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Synth-diy [mailto:<a href="mailto:synth-diy-bounces@dropmix.xs4all.nl">synth-diy-bounces@<wbr>dropmix.xs4all.nl</a>]<br>
> On Behalf Of David Moylan<br>
> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2016 11:33 AM<br>
> To: <a href="mailto:mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca">mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca</a><br>
> Cc: <a href="mailto:synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl">synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [sdiy] Better waveforms of our nature<br>
><br>
> Ah, yeah, got confused about which was at twice the<br>
> frequency. I do think this method would cover a lot of the<br>
> same ground as the bright/even harmonics block in Don's<br>
> chart. And could be fairly simple to add a x2 saw to a<br>
> typical saw vco.<br>
><br>
> That would still leave the mellow/even and mellow/all.<br>
> Mellow/all looks a lot like a full wave rectified sine (which<br>
> would automatically be at double frequency of the input<br>
> sine). Similar mixing as you described with sine would cover<br>
> most of mellow/even range. For mellow/all (FWR<br>
> estimate) the oscillator could just be retuned or octave<br>
> switched if available.<br>
><br>
> Of course, this is all theoretical; haven't tried it. Looks<br>
> like denominator of rectified sine is (4n^2 - 1). So not<br>
> mathematically equivalent but ballpark and again, low parts<br>
> count to provide this wave in analog hardware. Here's a<br>
> table of harmonic divisors scaled against<br>
> n=1 value to get relative divisors. So, the rectified sine<br>
> would be mellower then the parabolic wave as the amplitude of<br>
> the harmonics is dropping faster. More specifically, 80% of<br>
> amplitude at n=2 and approaching 75% of amplitude as n increases.<br>
><br>
> n2 | 4n^2 - 1<br>
> 1 1 1<br>
> 2 4 5<br>
> 3 9 11.6<br>
> 4 16 21<br>
> 5 25 33<br>
> 6 36 47<br>
> 7 49 65<br>
> 8 64 85<br>
><br>
> I still think it would be fun to experiment with given its<br>
> simplicity.<br>
> Come to think of it, since the difference in harmonic<br>
> amplitudes is only in the range of 75-80%, you could just mix<br>
> a bit more of the FWR wave to compensate and have a fairly<br>
> small error.<br>
><br>
> Dave<br>
><br>
> On 10/17/2016 08:25 PM, <a href="mailto:mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca">mskala@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca</a> wrote:<br>
> > On Mon, 17 Oct 2016, David Moylan wrote:<br>
> >> Not quite. A sine wave only represents one<br>
> harmonic/overtone. So if<br>
> >> you add one an octave up you're just adding that single<br>
> harmonic, no<br>
> >> other even harmonics. You can build it up with multiple sines (if<br>
> >> you have extra<br>
> ><br>
> > I said "adding a sine wave to a traditional oscillator at twice the<br>
> > frequency" and meant that the traditional oscillator would be<br>
> > something like a sawtooth - so the sine wave provides the<br>
> fundamental<br>
> > and the sawtooth at twice the fundamental frequency<br>
> provides all even harmonics.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
> Synth-diy mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl">Synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl</a><br>
> <a href="http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/synth-diy</a><br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Synth-diy mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl">Synth-diy@dropmix.xs4all.nl</a><br>
<a href="http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://dropmix.xs4all.nl/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/synth-diy</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>