Hi Atom, The existing and future LFO are implemented as software generated cycles. I haven't quite worked out the exact math used to generate the waveform (is the sine calculated or is it based on a lookup table?) but since we already know how to set the MG via a MIDI controller it would seem possible to modulate its rate using a second LFO. You're right, saw with an inverter is reverse saw. Since we'll have to implement triangle we might as well make the decision when we get to it as to whether to use an inverter or not. Perhaps the inverter will be a behind the scenes thing anyway. Also, square wave needs to be pulse width ratio adjustable. LFO 2 will be both free running and note triggered just like EG3 can be re/triggered except that we'll add free running as an option. Also, I am hoping to be able to change the EG3 triggering so that it can be retriggered by LFO2. So then the LFO could be triggered by notes but EG3 can recycle according to the LFO rate. That would give us the ability to cycle through the EG3 envelope over and over. Oh and I'm hoping to make the original LFO free running optionable too. Detune would definitely be zippery because it is only 2 bits in depth. A better way would be to implement a second master clock. But that would take a hardware mod. Mike. --- In korgpolyex@yahoogroups.com, Atom Smasher <atom@...> wrote: > > On Sat, 14 Jul 2007, korgpolyex800 wrote: > > > I think we definitely want to keep the existing MG and LFO but add a > > second LFO that has square, sine, saw, reverse saw and triangle as well > > as randomize. Plus an inverter. > > > We will want to be able to route them to VCF cutoff, VCF resonance and > > DCO freq (vibrato) and DCO volume (for lovely tremolo). Any others? > ============= > > how about making MG (LFO) 1 and 2 targets for MG (LFO) 2? > > can detune be a target? or would it sound "zippery" because of the way > that the detune is implemented? > > if the new LFO 2 has an inverter, would it need a saw and reverse saw? or > would the reverse saw really be handled by the inverter? > > this may be overkill for a poly-800, but would the LFO 2 be free-running? > trigger per note? re-trigger on each new note in a chord? my guess is that > either of the first two options would be good; the third option would be > not so good. > > > -- > ...atom > > ________________________ > http://atom.smasher.org/ > 762A 3B98 A3C3 96C9 C6B7 582A B88D 52E4 D9F5 7808 > ------------------------------------------------- > > "The sum of intelligence on the planet is a constant. > The population is increasing." > -- Cole's Axiom >
Message
LFO's
2007-07-17 by korgpolyex800