I was just about to suggest that maybe something like a low discrepancy
sequence could be interesting to explore - such as the golden ratio (which
strongly relates to fib of course!).
On Mon, Oct 16, 2017 at 10:22 AM, Andy Farnell
wrote:
>
> Bit late to the thread,
Bit late to the thread, but if you look around Pd archives you will
find a patch called Fiboverb that I made about 2006/7. As you surmise,
the relative co-primality of fib(n) sequence has great properties
for diffuse reverbs.
Just reading about the proposed Go spacing idea, seems very
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu wrote:
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â DÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â 2D
>|Â Â Â Â 1Â Â Â Â |Â 2Â Â Â Â Â Â Â |
>|Â Â Â Â |Â Â Â Â |Â |Â 1Â Â Â Â |
>|_|_|__|__|_|_
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â g___|Â |
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â {__|
>
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
D 2D
| 1 | 2 |
| | | | 1 |
|_|_|__|__|_|_
g___| |
{__|
a__| |
{|
So, why is g= ln(2) the best solution?
So far, we haven't scaled g, the ratio of the first
Am 02.10.2017 um 04:42 schrieb Stefan Sullivan:
Forgive me if you said this already, but did you try negative feedback
values? I wonder what that does to the aesthetics of the reverb.
Stefan
yes... but it's not recommended for the loop unless it's part of a
feedback matrix
you get half the
Forgive me if you said this already, but did you try negative feedback
values? I wonder what that does to the aesthetics of the reverb.
Stefan
On Oct 1, 2017 16:24, "gm" wrote:
> and here's the impulse response, large 4APs Early- > 3AP Loop
>
> its pretty smooth without
and here's the impulse response, large 4APs Early- > 3AP Loop
its pretty smooth without tweaking anything manually
https://soundcloud.com/traumlos_kalt/whd-ln2-impresponse/s-d1ArU
the autocorrelation and autoconvolution are also very good
Am 02.10.2017 um 00:45 schrieb gm:
So...
Heres my
Am 02.10.2017 um 00:45 schrieb gm:
Formal proof outstanding.
sorry, weird Germanism, read that as "missing" please
___
dupswapdrop: music-dsp mailing list
music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
https://lists.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/music-dsp
Am 01.10.2017 um 18:35 schrieb gm:
Counterintutively, there is no solution for g=a for N =2 (except g=a=1);
(the solution for g=a and N=3 is 1/golden ratio )
make that phi^2 = 0.382..ect
For those who didnt follow, after all this I now postulate that
*ratio = 1/ ( N - ln(2) +1) *
with N =
Am 01.10.2017 um 16:52 schrieb gm:
So I tested a familiy of numbers based on a = ln(2)
that should read g= ln(2); (a ~= 0.76597)
It seems one of the best, but why?
Counterintutively, there is no solution for g=a for N =2 (except g=a=1);
(the solution for g=a and N=3 is 1/golden ratio )
Am 30.09.2017 um 22:44 schrieb Stefan Sullivan:
Sometimes the simplest approach is the best approach. Sounds like a
good reverb paper to me. Some user evaluation and references to
standard papers and
That would be a paper on numerology then...
I generalized a bit:
Na - 1 = a*g
a = 1 /
Sometimes the simplest approach is the best approach. Sounds like a good
reverb paper to me. Some user evaluation and references to standard papers
and
On Sep 29, 2017 8:51 AM, "gm" wrote:
> It's a totally naive laymans approach
> I hope the formatting stays in place.
>
Am 29.09.2017 um 17:50 schrieb gm:
For instance you can make noise loops with randomizing all phases by
FFT in circular convolution
that sound very reverberated.
to clarify: I ment noise loops from sample material, a kind of time
strech, but with totally uncorrelated phases
It's a totally naive laymans approach
I hope the formatting stays in place.
The feedback delay in the loop folds the signal back
so we have periods of a comb filter.
| | | |
|__|__|__|___
Now we want to fill the period densly with impulses:
Am 29.09.2017 um 02:48 schrieb gm:
Another idea is to alter the Go method as follows
instead of
Na mod 1 = a/2
Na mod 1 = a*0.618... and Na mod 1 = 1- a*0.382... respectively
Some observations:
It's the same as 1/(1 + 0.382..) for N=2
This seems to do what Fibonacci does, it fills the line
And, "The simplest digital reverberator is nothing more than a delay of
30 msec."
Am 29.09.2017 um 13:16 schrieb STEFFAN DIEDRICHSEN:
Maybe that’s because of Hal Chamberlin, who wrote in his book “Musical
Applications of Microprocessors”, 2nd ed., p. 508:
“Perhaps the simplest, yet most
Maybe that’s because of Hal Chamberlin, who wrote in his book “Musical
Applications of Microprocessors”, 2nd ed., p. 508:
“Perhaps the simplest, yet most effective, digital signal-processing function
is the simulation of reverberation”.
There you are. ;-)
Best,
Steffan
> On
ay
ratios or feedback ratios – maybe I didn’t look closed enough.
*From:*music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu
[mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] *On Behalf Of *gm
*Sent:* 28. september 2017 18:41
*To:* music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
*Subject:* Re: [music-dsp] Reverb, magic numbers and random
: music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu
[mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of gm
Sent: 28. september 2017 18:41
To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] Reverb, magic numbers and random generators #2 the Go
approach
But this ratio scheme actually is the result
Another idea is to alter the Go method as follows
instead of
Na mod 1 = a/2
Na mod 1 = a*0.618... and Na mod 1 = 1- a*0.382... respectively
to get rid of the detuning procedure
a quick listening test seems promising, but I haven't investigated it in
depth yet
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] ->
|
Now that I had to explain it I realize a few more things
It has some interesting properties not just on the echo density but also
on the phase delays
(of course these are related somehow).
the untuned pitches are [-12] -7.02. -15.86 -21.68 ... and -3.86, -9.68,
-14.04 ... and inverted
Am 28.09.2017 um 17:18 schrieb Martin Lind:
To get a realistic (or a musical for matter) sounding reverb it will include
thousands of listening tests with various test signals - I haven't seen any
'automated' or any particular strategy for tuning reverbs in the wild other
than extensive
[mailto:music-dsp-boun...@music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of gm
Sent: 28. september 2017 16:47
To: music-dsp@music.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [music-dsp] Reverb, magic numbers and random generators #2 the Go
approach
And here's how I've been doing it before the RNG approach, I present you:
The Go
I think, this structure you mentioned (2 AP filter + delay and a feedback node)
has been investigated by Bill Gardner. I used this structure, too, but it took
4 allpass filter to make it work. But still it has a repetitive sound, which
goes away, if the feedback factor approaches 1.0. So, it’s
I have this idée fixe that a reverb bears some resemblance with some
types of random number generators especially the lagged Fibonacci generator.
Consider the simplified model reverb block
+-> [AP Diffusor AP1] -> [AP Diffusor Ap2] -> [Delay D] ->
|
26 matches
Mail list logo