Emu XL-7 & MP-7 User's Group

You're exactly right with everything you've said.  I promised that I'd get
you a preset that emulates realtime Q, and I found what I think is a sysex
dump of it, but can't quite seem to get it to work.  I'll try and recreate
it...

-Aaron

PS.  I think "BlissBatz" is the same as BatPhaser?

drk@... wrote:

> Well Emu can certainly defend themselves, but it may be helpful
> to understand that the filters Emu uses were(are?) quite
> innovative for digital filters, though when compared against
> today's world of VA type filters they seem inadequate.  What Emu
> "invented" with the Morpheus concept was the ability to make a
> filter that could be changed from one type to another in real-time.
> So you could have some pretty twisted filtering characteristics,
> far beyond the tradition sweep the cutoff frequency limitation.
>
> But this approach to filter implimentation has a limit in that only
> one parameter can be varied in realtime.  Now this parameter
> can cause quite complex things, including changing multiple
> traditional filter parameters - things like sweepin frequency while
> changing bnandwidth.  But you only get to "morph" in one
> dimension at a time.  So a tradition synth filter, like a 4 pole
> lowpass can have real time adjust of cutoff but not resonance.
>
> The work around is that in an instrument like the P2K
> architecture, since it supports truly dynamic voice allocation and
> is multitimbral, you can switch filter types on the fly from note to
> note.  So to change Q is really replacing one filter with a slight
> variation with the Q increased or decreased.  This is why
> resonance is usually a note-time only adjustment.  I do seem to
> recall at some point either my Audity 2K or Ultra having a filter
> where Q was not fixed at note time, but I could be mistaken.
>
> BTW, the above explaination is what I have sussed out of the
> Emu information and products I have owned over the years.  So it
> could be incorrect, especially in the details.  But this is my
> understanding of why the filters are as they are.
>
> Should Emu change this?  That's another question entirely.  Its a
> tradeoff really.  Is it better to have a few traditional filters that
> behave "normal", or to have the flexibility of filter types.  Also, Emu
> has quite a few morphing filters in their archives.  They could
> well add new ones to the XL7/MP7.
>
> Which leads me to a question: why isn't the famous "BatPhaser"
> filter in the XL7/MP7?
>
> drK
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> xl7-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/