|
Kyma Forum
![]() Confabulation
![]() ping pong?
|
| next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: ping pong? |
|
Gareth Whittock Member |
I don't suppose anyone here has an elegant implementation of a ping pong delay have they? Yes I know there's one in the examples that come with Kyma but it isn't a PROPER one. My idea of a PROPER ping pong is consecutive delays emerging from alternating channels. The example is a bit of a fudge using 2 delays, one twice as long as the other - not the same. How about a four channel ping pong? I'm sure somebody's done this - but are you willing to share? Gareth IP: Logged |
|
pete Member |
Gareth I haven't done one, but I think I know what you mean and what you need to do it. You want two delays whose outputs feed each others inputs and also feed the left and right outputs respectively. The easy bit. An input module feeds 'delay a' which feeds 'delay b' which feeds the output. The not so easy bit. Now to get the signel back to the input of 'delay a' you have to use two modules called feedback. These work as a pair ,so by placing the one who's icon points to the left, between the 'delay b' and the output, you can use the other feedback module to reinject the signal where ever you want. As you will want control over the level of feedback and the level of input, I suggest you put a two channel mixer module between the input and 'delay a'. Then place the second feedback module into input 2 of this mixer. Now you have all the signals you need, but not where you want them. As every thing so far is on the left you will need to put a normal mixer just before the output and put a second module called a chaneller into its input . Then feed the output of 'delay a' into the chaneller and set the parameters to channel the left signal to the right. hope it works, Pete Johnston. IP: Logged |
|
JohnCowan Member |
Gareth, I did create a ping pong delay. I would be happy to share with the forum but the last I heard that was not possible yet. John Cowan IP: Logged |
|
Gareth Whittock Member |
That's what I mean. Kymas method of creating feedback loops is incredibly long winded. Why can't we just drag signal paths back and fore? Feedback is extremely useful in all sorts of synthesis and this I feel is a mojor weakness in the graphical interface. While I'm at it, (I do love Kyma honestly), why, when you drag another device, say a granulator into a signal path does it tell you it's going to get rid of your inputs and substitute it's own? Wouldn't it be better if it asked you what you wanted to do, (like certain mixers sometimes do)? AAAAND, (last gripe for now), How about just K for kill and just spacebar for compile etc. I program with an instrument in my hand and I've nearly dropped it a couple of times, (in fact, spacebar to stop, spacebar to start, From any window) makes a lot more sense to me. Sorry to come over all negative but it's surprising how simple little things are amplified when you spend many hours doing it. Gareth IP: Logged |
|
SSC Administrator |
Gareth and Pete, Please try out the ping pong with feedback examples that I put in the Sound Exchange forum. IP: Logged |
|
dennis Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gareth Whittock: [B]That's what I mean. Kymas method of creating feedback loops is incredibly long winded. Why can't we just drag signal paths back and fore? Feedback is extremely useful in all sorts of synthesis and this I feel is a mojor weakness in the graphical interface. Dennis musing on feedback: Sometimes, I get so many (too many?) lines in a design that I have a hard time telling what is connected to what. In these cases I find the current way of indicating feedback is a graphical advantage. OTOH, it's not so intuitive. A practical problem with using a simple backward flowing signal line for feedback is that feedbackLoopOutput takes a parameter (the delay time). You'd need a place to put/show/adjust this on the feedback signal line. To me, the really cool thing about FeedbackLoopInput/Output is that it works ACROSS DSPs! I can process one signal so much that I max-out one processor, send it through a FeedbackLoopI/O to another card, and twist it some more! And Kyma schedules this automatically! This is incredibly powerful! So powerful, I can only explain it with sentences that end in exclamation points! [QUOTE]Originally posted by Gareth Whittock: Dennis: I understand your difficulty. But I think Kyma needs to recongize a "special" key in the signal flow editor as the compile/load/run command for example. Otherwise, it couldn't tell when you want to type a space (like in a parameter field) and when you wanted to compile/load/darn-try-it-again. Maybe some other single key, like F1, could be an alternative to control-spacebar. (Does a Mac have an F1 key?) [QUOTE]Originally posted by Gareth Whittock: Sorry to come over all negative but it's surprising how simple little things are amplified when you spend many hours doing it. Dennis: I know what you mean! IP: Logged |
|
pete Member |
Hay Dennis I couldn't agree more. IP: Logged |
|
Gareth Whittock Member |
Good po9ints here Dennis though I don't get all of it, (probably just me being thick). I'm used to Audio Mulch which has bare contraptions with no inputs or outputs. You just drag connections from one to the other. It always works and is very intuitive, (even I can use it ) It doesn't have the ability to hide connections while you work on another part of the sound like Kyma though - I like that in fact there's a lot it doesn't have - which is why I use Kyma but this method of connection is dead easy.As far as the spacebar idea is concerned - I take your point but how about using function keys - assuming Macs have them - they must have something like that. Assignable function keys for start/stop, calling down often used prototypes etc. I still think Kyma is superb though. OK how about quote: IP: Logged |
All times are CT (US) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
![]() |
|
This forum is provided solely for the support and edification of the customers of Symbolic Sound Corporation.