For those who do not recall: This was about extending the peak controller. Usually, you use the peak controller to make one sound dependent on another. My idea was to make a sound dependent on a signal, which shall not be played. That way, you can produce LFOs only for controlling, but don't output them as audio.
The fix is already coded by me (not public yet) and includes: 1) An additional wheel which let's you refine the amount 2) A checkbox which does force the peak controller to *not* take the abs value, but the value as it is (maybe negative). 3) A checkbox to mute the output, since such LFOs should not be put into the final audio. I am still unsure if the 3rd point is needed. Actually, you could just put these controllers onto an FX channel and mute the whole channel. This would have the same effect. However, imagine that you want to use the peak controller in the instrument's FX chain, not in the mixers. Then you can mute the instrument, but this will stop the sound before it will reach the effect (contrary to the mixer, where the sound is muted *after* all effects are passed). Should I keep feature (3) or should we change the mute behaviour for instruments? I hope you get the question, if not, feel free to ask. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
