On 07/02/25 18:37, Dr. Thomas Tensi via Sox-users wrote:
> multi-tap (which can probably already be done
> with "echo" already, if with some effort)
In my opinion "echo" is a perfect multitap delay (only
currently without a feedback loop). And I do not see any
effort to provide a multitap delay with "echo": it's the same.
Good to know. No problem here, then.
> and feedback for example.
My recommendation would be to use the following
syntax:
echo gainIn gainOut [-f globalFeedback]
delay1 decay1 [-f stageFeedback1]
{ delayX decayX [-f stageFeedbackX] }
If the feedback is a factor (instead of a decibels value) one
could also use negative factors to produce cancellation
effects.
Perfect on both counts.
I find it problematic to provide an effect that uses an established
name but does
something much more complex and different.
Yes. The name "chorus" has been subverted over the years to mean
this miserable substitute. Note that Csound does not have
an effect called "chorus", just a variety of delay-line effects
with which you can implement what is now known as chorus.
Me, I'm old, so I tend to stick to the original meaning.
Sort of on-topic, the pivotal Yamaha DX7 implemented
phase modulation, not true FM, for the same reason.
Yes, the existing "chorus" should remain,
especially as it now does what it says on the box.
"The Chorus Effect Revisited"
Nice
the question is whether to implement a new effect that follows some
academical approach and sounds really good or instead
provide an effect that just implements common practice in
sound effects.
"Both" is the most attractive option.
A what-I-call-real chorus is something else and
sounds quite different from the poor man's approach.
> 255 stages are immediately possible (following your reasoning)
> and that should be more than sufficient.
> I assume that exceeding that number is not at all helpful,
I used 300 stages to test that it worked. The resulting audio
was -er- most interesting. More practically, you never know
what people might want to do, so no-limits is always preferable
unless there is a significant cost, like much speed.
> Any term is okay for me for a more sophisticated effect.
> What about "choir" or "choral" for your "khorus"?
Just names. I'm making this up as I go along.
I haven't done anything yet, just thinking.
Nowadays you mostly have modulated digital delay lines for a
chorus.
You do. A pedal that did forward and reverse FFTs would be
as big as a shoe box, cost a sack of money and need
a mains plug, not batteries.
Those guys know about musical effects, hence they count
as a valid reference.
We are not wikipedia here. We can do whatever seems best.
I think we're still arguing about what "chorus" means
in the DSP domain. Bike shed if you ask me.
Most domestic incomprehensions are actually caused
by the parties meaning different things by the same words.
That's why I suggested an extended vocabulary for these variants.
Don't let's get into a tiff over significands!
And why throw the baby out with the bathwater?
That depends on the baby, not the bathwater :)
However, it just needs one person to love the baby
for it to be happy, feel welcome and grow healthy.
> If you want to offer an unprecedented choral effect,
> then I'll be the first to support you.
Thanks. Maybe together we can educate the world.
As for "unprecedented", well, I'm old like I said.
You used to be able to implement chori using
modified tape decks with spinning heads (the Tempophon)
https://wikidelia.net/wiki/Tempophon
but they went out of favor with the insurgence of digital.
> There are still so many things to do with SoX_ng
Tell me about it. >300 issues so far. One by one...
M
_______________________________________________
Sox-users mailing list
Sox-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-users
