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

Resonance or Q is a note-on parameter only.  If you notice in the patchcords
section, 'FiltRes has an apostrophe before the name, which is the universal
symbol for "note-on only".  It is not a bug, but rather the hardware design.
This comes up about monthly on the various lists.

With some creative programming, however, you *can* do some realtime "Q"
effects.  I'll see if I can dig up the patch that I did a while back and I'll
try to post it to the files section tomorrow.

-Aaron

PS. by the way, every now and again, I do like to write code as opposed to
list posts... =)

mikexl7@... wrote:

> I am at a total loss here.  there must be someone that has had the
> same problem out there.  I am a little conserned considering that
> aron from emu has passed by and not touched on this one.  If anyone
> has any ideas please feel free to contact me directly, or just post.
>
> thanks again
>
> Mike
>
> "Another thing i am noticing that i dont know how to fix is....
>
>  When i use the defaullt preset to make my own instrament when i use
>  the Filter Q quick edit knob it dose not change the sound till the
>  next note is played rendering it usless when i need it most.  I use
>  it most often to thin out a fat leed or pad wile holding down a
> chord
>  or note.  How do i change this?  anyone know what i am talking about
>  here?"
>
>
> 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/

Thank you both for getting back to me on this one i appreciate it.
First off thanks aron for mentioning that the apostrophe simbolizes 
the note on thing i had no idea that that was the case.

And as for creative programing i am up to it and would love to know 
how you worked this out!
oh ya is there a resource for learning about programing with emu 
patch chord system?  

I would love to read what people who have a better understanding than 
myself are dooing with this form of modern modular synthasizer.  I 
consider myself to be above biginer but am yet to be a master and 
would love to increase the speed of my learning in this area of my 
music making.

thanks 

Mike


--- In xl7@y..., Aaron Eppolito <aarone+xl7@e...> wrote:
> Resonance or Q is a note-on parameter only.  If you notice in the 
patchcords
> section, 'FiltRes has an apostrophe before the name, which is the 
universal
> symbol for "note-on only".  It is not a bug, but rather the 
hardware design.
> This comes up about monthly on the various lists.
> 
> With some creative programming, however, you *can* do some 
realtime "Q"
> effects.  I'll see if I can dig up the patch that I did a while 
back and I'll
> try to post it to the files section tomorrow.
> 
> -Aaron
> 
> PS. by the way, every now and again, I do like to write code as 
opposed to
> list posts... =)
>

Shows you what can happen if you leave your XL-7's Arpeggiator on all 
the time.  Emu folks, this is a throw back to the E-Chip that did that 
filters in the Morpheus (many moons ago). You still don't have that 
working? (Real time resonance on a filter).  I had assumed that the 
reason that all of the modules and samplers since that groundbreaking 
instrument had implemented a weaker filter suite was to overcome that 
limitation.

Wow.

That being said, I do just run either a patter or an arp all the time, 
and I seem to be able to get things tweaky.  So it's a deficiency that 
can be tough to spot.

Bruce


--- In xl7@y..., Aaron Eppolito <aarone+xl7@e...> wrote:
> Resonance or Q is a note-on parameter only.  If you notice in the 
patchcords
> section, 'FiltRes has an apostrophe before the name, which is the 
universal
> symbol for "note-on only".  It is not a bug, but rather the hardware 
design.
> This comes up about monthly on the various lists.
> 
> With some creative programming, however, you *can* do some realtime 
"Q"
> effects.  I'll see if I can dig up the patch that I did a while back 
and I'll
> try to post it to the files section tomorrow.
> 
> -Aaron
> 
> PS. by the way, every now and again, I do like to write code as 
opposed to
> list posts... =)
> 
> mikexl7@y... wrote:
> 
> > I am at a total loss here.  there must be someone that has had the
> > same problem out there.  I am a little conserned considering that
> > aron from emu has passed by and not touched on this one.  If 
anyone
> > has any ideas please feel free to contact me directly, or just 
post.
> >
> > thanks again
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > "Another thing i am noticing that i dont know how to fix is....
> >
> >  When i use the defaullt preset to make my own instrament when i 
use
> >  the Filter Q quick edit knob it dose not change the sound till 
the
> >  next note is played rendering it usless when i need it most.  I 
use
> >  it most often to thin out a fat leed or pad wile holding down a
> > chord
> >  or note.  How do i change this?  anyone know what i am talking 
about
> >  here?"
> >
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > xl7-unsubscribe@y...
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

ya Bruce this is kinda lame indeed. When using many of the presets 
this feature seems to be working fine but i haven't done the digging 
to see how they got around it yet.  

I own an E5000 and it works fine in this respect so i dont know why 
it is the case with the synth inside the XL-7.  
What is up with that?

I don't understand why some of the instraments of the modern age are 
dumping some of the sound sculpting tools and abilities of the synths 
of old.  It seems odd to me, like if the thing can handle 128 notes 
there must be the power under the hood to have the filter sweepable.  
I am not a code wrighter so i cant say that i know how thies things 
are made today but this is just a general comment on how electronic 
instraments are changing.

The bottom line is i am just glad that the E5000 is in my rack and 
the filters in it don't work the same way as the XL-7's


--- In xl7@y..., bruce@s... wrote:
> Shows you what can happen if you leave your XL-7's Arpeggiator on 
all 
> the time.  Emu folks, this is a throw back to the E-Chip that did 
that 
> filters in the Morpheus (many moons ago). You still don't have that 
> working? (Real time resonance on a filter).  I had assumed that the 
> reason that all of the modules and samplers since that 
groundbreaking 
> instrument had implemented a weaker filter suite was to overcome 
that 
> limitation.
> 
> Wow.
> 
> That being said, I do just run either a patter or an arp all the 
time, 
> and I seem to be able to get things tweaky.  So it's a deficiency 
that 
> can be tough to spot.
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> --- In xl7@y..., Aaron Eppolito <aarone+xl7@e...> wrote:
> > Resonance or Q is a note-on parameter only.  If you notice in the 
> patchcords
> > section, 'FiltRes has an apostrophe before the name, which is the 
> universal
> > symbol for "note-on only".  It is not a bug, but rather the 
hardware 
> design.
> > This comes up about monthly on the various lists.
> > 
> > With some creative programming, however, you *can* do some 
realtime 
> "Q"
> > effects.  I'll see if I can dig up the patch that I did a while 
back 
> and I'll
> > try to post it to the files section tomorrow.
> > 
> > -Aaron
> > 
> > PS. by the way, every now and again, I do like to write code as 
> opposed to
> > list posts... =)
> > 
> > mikexl7@y... wrote:
> > 
> > > I am at a total loss here.  there must be someone that has had 
the
> > > same problem out there.  I am a little conserned considering 
that
> > > aron from emu has passed by and not touched on this one.  If 
> anyone
> > > has any ideas please feel free to contact me directly, or just 
> post.
> > >
> > > thanks again
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > "Another thing i am noticing that i dont know how to fix is....
> > >
> > >  When i use the defaullt preset to make my own instrament when 
i 
> use
> > >  the Filter Q quick edit knob it dose not change the sound till 
> the
> > >  next note is played rendering it usless when i need it most.  
I 
> use
> > >  it most often to thin out a fat leed or pad wile holding down a
> > > chord
> > >  or note.  How do i change this?  anyone know what i am talking 
> about
> > >  here?"
> > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > xl7-unsubscribe@y...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

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

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/

<ramble>
They were quite groundbreaking back in the early 90's when they came
out.  But as I have mentioned, even my new ultra powerful XL-7 with
its nice CPU cannot do all of the filter types that my Morpheus can. 
Many folks say so what, and they are welcome to that.  But some of the
stranger filter types are really interesting.  I still think the
Morpheus is the best module for making spacey / ambient music ever.
(your milage may vary).

As far as real time Q on Z Plane type filters,  just because they
can't do it does not mean it can't be done.  Computationally it could
be a problem, but it should be possible.  There is no reason from a
mathematical standpoint to not be able to modify multiple axies (sp?)
of a Z plane filter at the same time, but it would take a bunch of CPU
and memory.  But then again take a look at what we can do now with
MP3, and imagine trying to implement that 15 years ago.

Anyhow, just armchair DSP quarterbacking on my part.  I still love my
Emu stuff.  Would not give it up for anything.  It takes its place
rightfully with some of the best of my rig.  

Oh yeah, one of the greatest combos I have yet to enjoy is a Korg Z1's
X/Y touchpad linked to Z Plane filters, again the Morph kicks
everyone's butt here.

</ramble>

Bruce

--- In xl7@y..., drk@d... 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