On Oct 31, 2003, at 12:07 PM, rreprobate wrote:
> --- In motm@yahoogroups.com, Mike Estee <mikest@a...> wrote:
>> The feedback should be literal, that is, the final output stage of the
>> looper should have two outs and two inputs.
>
> Love the idea of it just being a delay line with no other features.
> Patch it into an echo
> with whatever other modules you want. I do this all the time. The only
> drawback is
> that it's way lo-fi compared to feedback done in DSP. As long as you
> could turn the
> mix to 100% wet and feedback to 0% I'd be happy.
I would argue that it's not ∗that∗ lowfi ^_^, but yeah, you'd get
coloration over time as the delay line loops. Anyway, there are much
better toys for looping. I totally love the idea of just a delay line.
In addition, I very much like the idea of keeping the things analog
does well in the analog domain and the things digital does well in the
digital domain.
For example, I think it's silly to do the filtering with a DSP
algorithm, you end up having to code back all the variances and
imperfections found in a real filter that make them sound good. You'll
get better filtering from any of the 400 series anyway. Same applies
for the mixing. What happens when the feedback overloads? In a digital
algorithm? In a analog circuit? I think those edge conditions are
important.
Time scaling resolution should be high enough to avoid zippering.
Ranges are fine way to overcome this.
Just the thought of a feedback delay line that incorporates a 440 makes
me drool ^_^
ps: has anyone else here played with the evolver? it's a dsp/analog
hybrid.