Now back to the orginal question, why doesn't the scheme that follows
the lagged Fibonacci generator achieve better results then my "Go" method?
Somehow the analogy between the simplified model
+-> [AP Diffusor AP1] -> [AP Diffusor Ap2] -> [Delay D] ->
| |
---------------------<--------------------------
and the (lagged) fibonacci generator
x[n] = x[n-j] + x[n-k] (mod m)
is flawed, they are not identical but only vaguely similar. If you see
that at all, I am a pretty fuzzy thinker if you havent noticed yet
But still I belive that optimal j/m and k/m exist, that achieve an even
better
distribution then the Go scheme, and work by a similar chaos mechanism
as the RNG does.
Similar to my retuned ratio for 4/5 of -1/(1-SQRT(5)), j/m and k/m are
said to be related to the Golden Ratio
(but not identical, and I am not sure hwo) and are somewhat similar in
magnitude to the ratios usefull in a reverb.
For instance 7/(2^4), 10/(2^4) gives 0,4375 and 0,625
or 1279/(2^11), 418/(2^11) give 0,62451 and 0,20410
and similar, you dont get 0.9 oder 0.1 for instance
So one idea is to find ratios that meet criteria for both schemes, for
example.
But possibly, since the LFG is desined to give fluktuating magnitudes
and the Go method is designed to give distributed pulses both approaches
don't match.
I am posting this mostly for inspiration, hoping that some one else will
find interesting solutions
and insights. I am positive that some one here knows a little bit about
chaos theorie and things like that.
_______________________________________________
dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
