If you're getting a VCFS be sure to get an inverter (as in the
Active processor etc.) this way
(using the second input) you can generate the resonance through
external feedback. The VCFS can really scream this way, the builtin
resonance just sounds weak by comparison. so the VCFS is not really
"complete" w/o an extra inverter.
The VCFS is not quite as "buzzy" as most 12dB filters,
but it doesn't sound like a 24dB either under even the highest slope
setting, so I'd say 18dB is a good guess.
With or without resonance, the VCFS tends to sound better under
fast envelope sweeps, so use this primarily if you're going for
percussive sounds. on the other hand the VCFQ sounds better
under fixed resonances and slow sweeps. I'd get one of each, plus
an Active processor to make the VCFS complete.
Active processor etc.) this way
(using the second input) you can generate the resonance through
external feedback. The VCFS can really scream this way, the builtin
resonance just sounds weak by comparison. so the VCFS is not really
"complete" w/o an extra inverter.
The VCFS is not quite as "buzzy" as most 12dB filters,
but it doesn't sound like a 24dB either under even the highest slope
setting, so I'd say 18dB is a good guess.
With or without resonance, the VCFS tends to sound better under
fast envelope sweeps, so use this primarily if you're going for
percussive sounds. on the other hand the VCFQ sounds better
under fixed resonances and slow sweeps. I'd get one of each, plus
an Active processor to make the VCFS complete.