I knew someone would eventually suggest over clocking the CPU.
The only problem with that is that those old CPU's had a maximum clock
rate that really was the maximum clock rate. And that is the principle
that applies to the old 80C85.
Look up tables are used for the sine wave. But I found that the fast
code for triangle, saw, random and PWM was to use real code.
So we're out of luck with that too.
I'll do a little test tonight and see how it goes with the LFO only
slowed down by half.
Mike
--- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote:
>
> cool... is #3 officially on the wish list?
>
> perhaps another way to address #1,2 would be to use different lookup
> tables (you are using lookup tables?) for different speeds. as an LFO
> speed increases, the human ear just has a harder time making out what
> waveform it is... so beyond a certain range, maybe there can be an
> "ohmygod" range where the waveforms aren't really distinguishable as
> "saw", "sine", etc and you can maybe use a distorted waveform that's
> optmized for high speed. the only exception would be random.
>
> might that be a way to get crazy-fast LFOs out of the old CPU?
>
> also, what is the maximum safe frequency to run the CPU (without adding
> coolers)? is that what it's running at?
>
> thanks...
>
>
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008, korgpolyex800 wrote:
>
> > 3) yes, this is possible but I don't propose to do this in the
near term
> > because it would require a second rewrite of the rewrite of the LFO's
> > and there are other things I'd like to move on to such as the
> > arpeggiator. Also, I find that the new waveforms and modulations that
> > you get from four (4) LFO's makes them really quite flexible and the
> > MIDI control is quite versatile too. But I do like the idea of
> > increasing the resolution.
>
> > --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@> wrote:
> >>
> >> 3) can the LFO speed (among other parameters) be made to respond
to 6-7
> >> bits of incoming controller data, even if it only saves 4 bits to
> >> memory? i think this option would be the best (for most
parameters that
> >> seem limited to 4 bit), because it would allow a very fluid (non
> >> zipper) control via midi, but still conserve memory usage.
>
>
>
>
> --
> ...atom
>
> ________________________
> http://atom.smasher.org/
> 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> "You ask me why the IWW is not patriotic to the United States.
> If you were a bum without a blanket; if you had left your
> wife and kids when you went west for a job, and had never
> located them since; if your job had never kept you long
> enough in a place to qualify to vote; if you slept in a
> lousy, sour bunkhouse, and ate food just as rotten as they
> could give you and get by with it; if deputy sheriffs shot
> your cooking cans full of holes and spilled your grub on the
> ground; if your wages were lowered on you when the bosses
> thought they had you down...if every person who represented
> law and order and the nation beat you up, railroaded you to
> jail, and the good Christian people cheered and told them to
> go to it, how in hell do you expect a man to be patriotic?
> This war is a businessman's war and we don't see why we
> should go out and get shot in order to save the lovely state
> of affairs that we now enjoy."
> -- William 'Big Bill' Haywood
>