A example that needs correction
Hi! I was investigating what I could use the spork-keyword for when I stumbled on this problem in the examples: The example fm3.ck is pretty wrong. It says that fm-synthesis is at sync 0 on SinOsc's, but that isn't true. sync 0 is sync frequency. fm2.ck does it right however. Experience the difference yourself by changing both fm2.ck and fm3.ck's c.freq-variable. Anyways, this is the result of my tries: http://hauntedhouse.wordpress.com/2007/08/18/ambientic-monotonic-pieceus/ I'll probably go on and work a little more with it. Gasten
Hi Gasten!
Hi! I was investigating what I could use the spork-keyword for when I stumbled on this problem in the examples: The example fm3.ck is pretty wrong. It says that fm-synthesis is at sync 0 on SinOsc's, but that isn't true. sync 0 is sync frequency. fm2.ck does it right however.
Ah, yes - actually we are both right. fm2.ck, which is an example of classic FM synthesis (sync == 2), is actually not modulating frequency directly, but the instantaneous phase (which in turn modulates frequency, but in a different manner). fm3.ck and correspondingly 0=>sync, demonstrates the result of modulating the frequency directly. I've added a bit more explanation in the examples to help clarify. In case anyone is wondering, here is a great explanation of FM synthesis by Julius Smith: http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/mdft/ Sinusoidal_Frequency_Modulation_FM.html
Anyways, this is the result of my tries: http://hauntedhouse.wordpress.com/2007/08/18/ambientic-monotonic- pieceus/
Sounds totally sweet! If you'd like, you should share this on the wiki! http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Sounds http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Programs Thanks for the post! Best, Ge!
sön 2007-08-19 klockan 01:50 -0400 skrev Ge Wang:
Anyways, this is the result of my tries: http://hauntedhouse.wordpress.com/2007/08/18/ambientic-monotonic- pieceus/
Sounds totally sweet!
If you'd like, you should share this on the wiki!
http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Sounds http://wiki.cs.princeton.edu/index.php/ChucK/Programs
Thanks for the post!
Best, Ge!
Nice that you liked it! By the way, when I crank up the volume on my consumer-grade system, the high and laud tones get all garbled up. I tried to solve this by adding a shred the would pan each note, but it didn't really cut it. After probing my system with chuck --probe, I found out that my sound card only supported 16 bit-audio. Is that why it sounds like someone have applied great amount of compression on the audio? Can someone test if this is true on other systems aswell? (Ah, yeah, I've added a lowpass filter to the patch, but that shouldn't do that, right?) Gasten
On 8/19/07, Martin Ahnelöv
After probing my system with chuck --probe, I found out that my sound card only supported 16 bit-audio. Is that why it sounds like someone have applied great amount of compression on the audio? Can someone test if this is true on other systems aswell?
(Ah, yeah, I've added a lowpass filter to the patch, but that shouldn't do that, right?)
Well, no, remember that plain audio CD's are 16 bit too and those *can* sound marvelous. There are limitations to 16 bit but with regard to listening I'd say that for dynamics neighbours are a larger bottleneck then 16 bit (asuming a linear implementation). LP filters shouldn't compress, unless of course most of your dynamics are in the high end, in that case you'll end up with less dynamics (but not realy compression as such). The sad thing is that cheap soundcards have cheap DAC's and cheap DAC's tend to have problems in the high end which is a bad match for fm which already has a tendency towards aliassing. IF you have good ears that can get quite offensive. Sorry, just packed up the big soundcard so I can't test your piece right now. You could try rendering it to .wav and burning it to CD to test on the nearest hi-fi? Hope that helps a bit? Kas.
participants (3)
-
Ge Wang -
Kassen -
Martin Ahnelöv