<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Decouple LFO&#x27;s ignoreNoteOn for resetPhase and resetFade?]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Any interest in decoupling the <code>resetPhase</code> and <code>resetFade</code> functions for the LFO's <code>ignoreNoteOn</code> boolean?</p>
<p dir="auto">I'm using <code>ignoreNoteOn</code> in my UI to mean "LFO Retrigger" but with retrigger off, the LFO Fade knob no longer has any effect.</p>
<p dir="auto">Looked into the code and I see they're both ignored when <code>ignoreNoteOn</code> is <code>true</code> - which is fair enough of course, the param name is literally <strong>Ignore Note On</strong>.</p>
<p dir="auto">But it feels weird to me that we can't have "<strong>don't</strong> retrigger the LFO on note one" at the same time as  "<strong>do</strong> respect the Fade time".</p>
<p dir="auto">The code change wouldn't be huge but the backwards compatibility situation might be bad.</p>
<p dir="auto">Or could we add two extra params, like <code>resetPhaseOnNoteOn</code> and <code>resetFadeOnNoteOn</code>, where the existing <code>ignoreNoteOn</code> overrides them both. Would that keep back-compat alive?</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.hise.audio/topic/14901/decouple-lfo-s-ignorenoteon-for-resetphase-and-resetfade</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2026 15:42:33 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.hise.audio/topic/14901.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2026 11:17:58 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl></channel></rss>