Christian Schoenebeck wrote: > Correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I can see it right now, you worked on > the actual EG curve shapes to replicate the original shapes as accurate as > possible, for example that the stages are actually a combination of linear > and > logarithmic curves in GSt, and the way the durations were calculated by GSt. > > However I think that particular issue, that the attack and decay phases are > not played entirely to their end, like it is usually the case with EGs in > general, is still from the very first EG version that I wrote long time > before > that. So I think I caused that "bug", and you probably did not compare this > precise behavior aspect with GSt. Am I wrong?
Yes, I think so. I remember doing measurements on how GSt reacted on note off in the different stages of EG. I don't remember how much I actually had to change the implementation, but at least in the comment of my commit r783 I wrote "Release stage can now start before attack stage ends." >>> Another change I planned regarding the EGs: we currently have a >>> behavior which >>> is probably a bit exotic compared to common EG implementations; if a >>> voice is >>> in release phase and a new note-on arrives on that respective MIDI >>> note, our >>> EGs abort the release phase and switch back to the previous phase >>> (i.e. back >>> to sustain phase). Now that behavior is sometimes useful, sometimes >>> negative, >>> depends on the sound. So maybe I make that configurable, I am not >>> very sure >>> about this particular change yet. >> >> I don't remember that one - it could be a simulated GigaStudio >> weirdness, but I don't know when it would be useful. > > No, that behavior was also from the very first EG version I wrote. I think > back then I had a piano string in mind, which would stop being dampened as > soon as you press the piano key down again. And at that point I already knew > this behavior aspect would deviate from common EG implementations, but I did > not care. Yes, you're right. This sounded familiar, so I had to search the mailing list archives: It seems I noticed this behavior and asked if it was a bug in 2004: https://sourceforge.net/p/linuxsampler/mailman/linuxsampler-devel/thread/14df1c3e04120514066f89786d%40mail.gmail.com :) /Andreas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Linuxsampler-devel mailing list Linuxsampler-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linuxsampler-devel
