On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 08:24 -0700, Len Ovens wrote: On Sun, 17 Aug 2014, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > On Sat, 2014-08-16 at 09:45 -0700, Len Ovens wrote: > >> A quick thought on fineness of control. It is true that 127 levels > >> tends to "zipper". However, 127 levels is more than enough for static > >> levels. > > > > I disagree. I never heard zipper noise, when I fade in or out or when > > using MIDI panning. Usually those steps aren't audible when fading or > > panning, but I often missed steps for static levels. Speaking for synth > > from the 80th and 90th, for the panning synth usually didn't use all 128 > > values, but 128 steps usually are used for the volume. I don't remember > > audible steps when fading, but I remember that there were not enough > > steps for optimal mixing. YMMV! > > I don't know if it matters, but was that a linear fade or log?
I don't know? On Sun, 2014-08-17 at 16:15 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote: > Suppose you have *real* faders which have a range of 127 mm. > That's not far from a typical size on a pro mixer. > Would you ever adjust them by half a millimeter ? Good point! As I already pointed out, I never noticed zipper noise when sending volume control to a synth, but sometimes 128 steps (and IIRC all 128 steps were used) were not enough. Perhaps it was neither linear nor log, but bad programmed usage of those steps. I remember that for panning often less then 10 steps were provided, I dislike/d this a lot. IIRC panning sometimes didn't effect a hold note, it was used for the next played note, so at least this can't be compared to a digital mixer. -- http://iknowwhereyourcatlives.com/ _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
