On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 06:24:41PM -0700, Ken Restivo wrote: > Rolling by on randomize came a Me and My Cronies jam/joke from years ago: > > http://www.restivo.org/blog/podpress_trac/web/558/0/Not_OK_Computer.ogg nice! > And I was struck by how much PHASEX sounds like a real analog synth, like an ARP 2600 or similar, and so much more real than any other software synths I've used. > > It sounds so... raw, uncontrolled, well, ANALOG. Most software simulations sound more or less authentic, but all so much more "tame", for want of a better term. But PHASEX always sounded to me (and felt, as I was playing with it) that at any moment it could do something crazy like throw a DC offset, to into an uncontrollable oscillation, or blow up my speakers, etc. > > I don't like being at a loss for precise, engineering terms, or understanding WHY something is, so I'm asking any of the DSP'ers here who might also have looked at (and understood) PHASEX's source. > > Any ideas what is so different about PHASEX, and what might be this quality of it's sound I could be trying to describe? Perhaps it is not about a particolar DSP but probably you are using one of the follow wavetables for one or more oscillators: <https://github.com/williamweston/phasex/tree/v0.14.97/samples> Of course they are usable with any sampler/tracker/etc. Here is a simple test with SoX: for smp in phasex/samples/*.raw; do play -t raw -r 48000 -c 1 -e float -b 32 "${smp}" \ gain -9 speed 18 repeat 1000 fade h 0.05 1 0.2 done _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
