So they do it the (ouch) hard way. No wonder they were never entirely
successful.
I suppose the problem with bunching oscillators is that you're assuming that
you want the oscillators bunched at those fixed intervals. I could see
having them run at ill-tempered (heh) intervals for some nicely clangy
sounds (bells, anyone?).
Perhaps you could have oscillators bunched together, and them manipulate how
the bunches are offset from each other. The oscillators ∗within∗ each bunch
would be tempered to particular intervals. Or is this what you had in mind
to begin with? (Sorry for the poor description, I'm writing
free-thought...)
--PBr
> -----Original Message-----
> From:Tkacs, Ken [SMTP:ken.tkacs@...]
> Sent:Tuesday, December 05, 2000 9:29 AM
> To:'motm@egroups.com'
> Subject:RE: [motm] Long rave: Additive Synth VCO (was: MOTM 910 Nice
> Job Paul !!)
>
>
> I think it's the Kawai, which I have never used.
>
> Someone once told me though that you basically manipulate vertical bars
> (128
> of them) on screen. That's setting up a static harmonic series... I assume
> they could then be modulated, or morphed, or something.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brousseau, Paul E (Paul) [mailto:noise@...]
> Sent:Tuesday, 05 December, 2000 12:30 PM
> To:'motm@egroups.com'
> Subject:RE: [motm] Long rave: Additive Synth VCO (was: MOTM 910 Nice
> Job Paul !!)
>
> I like the idea of additive synthesis. The only "successful" additive
> synth
> I'm aware of is either the Kawai or Kurzweil line (I forget which). I
> know
> these are digital, but how are patches constructed in those? Do you
> literally sit down and program each of the 128 oscillators, or is there a
> bunched scheme (as you propose) going on?
>
>