Global pitch modulator problem

Christoph Hart

Ok, I think I finally get somewhere here.

The LFO will now work as expected when used in the pitch modulation chain. The days of having a weird constant mod that offsets the pitch modulation is over. The fade in and intensity modulation will now start from the center so if the intensity is modulated to zero the pitch will be exactly the same as when you bypass the LFO (by the way this also affects the stereo FX modulation which is basically the same problem).

However this will not solve the problem we have with the global modulators, but at least it's a solid foundation to build upon. Now my suggested solution is to add a new mode for the global modulators that can be switched between unipolar and bipolar. The default will be unipolar, but for our use case, we'll switch the LFO to bipolar and then all our problems are gone. The only thing that will be different is that now the gain modulation will be bipolar, but that's less of a problem than having to correct the pitch modulation.

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart said in Global pitch modulator problem:

global modulators that can be switched between unipolar and bipolar.

Will that cause an issue if you want to use the same LFO for both gain and pitch?

Christoph Hart

It will be different (not sure if it qualifies as "issue"): if you set it to bipolar, the LFO will oscillate around the center. In gain mode the center is -6dB (0.5) so you will notice some ducking if you enable the modulation (but the ducking will be constant if you modulate the LFO intensity so no weird compensation hacks anymore).

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart ~~Well I can't see any immediate problems with the idea~~ :)

Would I still need a compensation hack to prevent the ducking? I'm thinking my vibrato is suddenly going to sound quieter than my sustain, unless I use two LFOs but again that negates the advantage of global LFOs. Could add the bipolar/unipolar thing to the target rather than the origin?

Christoph Hart

@d-healey said in Global pitch modulator problem:

Could add the bipolar/unipolar thing to the target rather than the origin?

No, that's the entire problem. The LFO has to behave differently depending on whether it should be bipolar or not, thus the entire brainfuck.

Would I still need a compensation hack to prevent the ducking?

Add a simple gain with +6dB. Done.

BTW, I've just committed everything, so you can check it for yourself if it works like you need it.

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart said in Global pitch modulator problem:

Add a simple gain with +6dB. Done.
BTW, I've just committed everything, so you can check it for yourself if it works like you need it.

Thank you I'll take a look now. The simple gain will also boost regardless of the LFO intensity.

Christoph Hart

@d-healey And the LFO will duck it regardless the LFO intensity so you're fine :)

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart Aha that's good :)

d.healey

Getting a few build errors - to do with the scriptnode additions I think

../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/nodes/HiseNodes.h:152:24: error: ‘extra_mod’ does not name a type
  152 |   DEF_PARAMETER(Index, extra_mod);
      |                        ^~~~~~~~~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:112: note: in definition of macro ‘DEF_PARAMETER’
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                ^~~~~~~~~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:121: error: expected ‘>’ before ‘*’ token
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                         ^
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/nodes/HiseNodes.h:152:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘DEF_PARAMETER’
  152 |   DEF_PARAMETER(Index, extra_mod);
      |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:121: error: expected ‘(’ before ‘*’ token
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                         ^
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/nodes/HiseNodes.h:152:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘DEF_PARAMETER’
  152 |   DEF_PARAMETER(Index, extra_mod);
      |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:122: error: expected primary-expression before ‘>’ token
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                          ^
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/nodes/HiseNodes.h:152:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘DEF_PARAMETER’
  152 |   DEF_PARAMETER(Index, extra_mod);
      |   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/hi_dsp_library.h:111,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/hi_dsp.h:56,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/hi_components.h:57,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/hi_sampler.h:54,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/hi_scripting.h:80,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/hi_modules.h:57,
                 from ../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/hi_backend.h:55,
                 from ../../Source/../JuceLibraryCode/JuceHeader.h:17,
                 from ../../Source/MainComponent.h:12,
                 from ../../Source/MainComponent.cpp:12:
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:128: error: invalid use of ‘void’
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                                ^~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:128: note: in definition of macro ‘DEF_PARAMETER’
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);
      |                                                                                                                                ^~
../../../../../HISE/hi_backend/../hi_modules/../hi_scripting/../hi_sampler/../hi_components/../hi_dsp/../hi_dsp_library/node_api/helpers/node_macros.h:51:130: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘setIndex’
   51 | #define DEF_PARAMETER(ParameterName, ClassName) if constexpr (P == (int)Parameters::ParameterName) static_cast<ClassName*>(obj)->set##ParameterName(value);

Christoph Hart

oops, try again, it should work now.

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart Yep that fixed it.

When the LFO is set to bipolar the intensity slider doesn't appear to do anything.

HiseSnippet 1193.3oc4X0saiSDE1tId0ltvBKrBgPfjufK5J5VkvVJ+cQZaZRUDIMQ0YKHwEql5bRxnZOiY73.QHtfG.dG3IfmAdD3NtkKg612.3L1NISZyllZkFsqvWX44bNi824m47iaK3tPXHWXXVnyn.vv70rbFwjCpLfPYF0Oxv79VMIgRPXmP5vQAjvPnqgoYtiUDLKj2vv3W+ke9OKeHwivbgTRwWmwotPCpOUNkZ68+JpmWMRWnC0WS5c2utKmUg6wiP7jypnQ.w8BRe3DhRrMrLLuS0tTIW3HIRHDk4Pd2QNC3eOKQ9yngzy8.0hRFN3KJgrQkATutsGqqgF3Kp8TMOWhl+PqlztzIzmZAdyXF1S2gtMvbiEAoR2.HYpAo7IP5AVNtBZfbJGEdtmUcF5P5QPSsNTRj0v72spvQAXxc7IW.0D3hIaXq8JVbaa71i9xdQLWIkyr4rS3RnEaqGs4OtYgM+oMsuLqd8lKO0mQv87.wbYq7thEswsXQ9mChssGR7hfIBhp+r1z6rb1T2DsVSPNqNiJaE.oqqw85prUpmupGvH0rgO8z5GQjDkSIkFJW.HjTEbLOBFhQ0ItnBVGAgWH4AXb8U7eXjCuajGQNa3j5bSJCzdLiOT4nXgT4noGKdd4KGik+EaOJpYOtFscIg6CrZSktClOd2XN3EsZ213M8D6qaUsWOvUNEr4sp8MK734JGJ2MAJum0wd7yIdSMfXbChJH4H6Gjx1dBe6IBT5EkSEu9ikMmZvRmS0L2pJgU9aqbnq03629Jtlva9IxbKGhulr9uQBLsrZTqUpUCeZJvJc8.6PZ.2iHTGMqIfuKBXti4a+aG+OkUQH0Y5QSeMYHziK7SSmM4M0.5ieScJc.+.N1cfq91c74b4.Jq+rwcOb+FbdPUFAsBc0eIsGPBUETBAsn2+tbknPI2eLVhK16Hgf3rvleq0d6tCd06iT2+7J3smzZ0r1X0U+dikNfS4Tm38Tt2WxKAjf3IwSuBf3EVzJ2+OKZcJORhmSaRjB5OfYYNIx2AqJ3BHRXLvC+PVlanZCJYcQ053i3.qa7h+EuRYVRs1LkYowL0U26mnt2yxAKxEOSQrx9NwqsUmzsOFvxeWMw1sdIvVtR7y2QPXgA7vYdwNfOsCmor5SI9zPPE7epJRRmdENQLWVOubMTIm6dbHxHQbH4A97HlblPvbKseWOWzrsSpI+5rlclq.t9ZaN6Eo0SsWXLFcn9AdPU1PvCmMHFiuENLPORjmbL0YCraxY7fAbFclJnmB3Ax98AgN1mqBcfThCDqWj8TvCH5Qve39MvHOh.sSPFsE27wTmq+5csRfqs5zn8KUi6j1y96m14mBfmQDTBSNQOhUA6wsFFqBohbiZGCybzgDiU0nRCwIHSDNlXRyMXmN3n.LHd1XCysWzjBewkZGbk4UWi0UWMsJWXM4B+K8Np07l4dUwal8tNxdF80QmFqiugOwUvelaxOqREAd2XJndyh+ijErZpVaWxH9GXolbq3NEM7wplOy0UYheLlJZ964iyvddRF1ytYXOeRF1ydYXOeZF1ymsv8nZX4fHbRxjjSHg1USNXZNYVTybF+GDUFkjG

Christoph Hart

Yes thats the idea...

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart Oh, well when it's set to unipolar, if I pull the intensity to 0 the pitch goes to the max

Christoph Hart

Set it to bipolar, add a MIDI CC to the intensity modulation.

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart That works, I understand why, but it works :) Now if I set the pitch modulator to unipolar and pull the CC down to 0 the pitch is left at + 1/2 of the set pitch value.

Christoph Hart

@d-healey said in Global pitch modulator problem:

Now if I set the pitch modulator to unipolar

Then don't :)

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart lol but what if I want unidirectional pitch modulation? It's just occured to me also that it will require one simple gain per mic position to counteract the ducking, I might use a scriptFX instead.

And now I've realised the +6 simple gain would only work if I leave the gain mod intensity at its max of 1, but if I adjust this I'd have to figure out a new settings for the simple gain to counteract it. I don't think we've reached a perfect solution yet but it's very close.

Christoph Hart

@d-healey said in Global pitch modulator problem:

lol but what if I want unidirectional pitch modulation?

why?

d.healey

@Christoph-Hart I don't have a particular use case, I'm just thinking to the future. I actually think this won't be an issue though because you can use a bipolar mod and adjust the table to get the same effect as unipolar with the centre position at 0.

d.healey

I'm finding other problems with sharing the LFO with gain. Using the simple gain I can offset the gain when the intensity is 0, but as the intensity is increased I now get an undersirable gain boost from the LFO. Is there a way I could set the maximum upper gain?

I think the same issue is going to occur with xfade, I don't see a way to counteract this as there is no equivelant of the simple gain solution. A constant mod might be a solution if the value could be inverted, but I think we're getting into hacky territory again.

Global pitch modulator problem

17

1.8k

12.0k

104.1k