edited April 2010 in WTPA Version 2 Design
when you're including ADSR in the new design will there be
-cyclic mode (buchla style, already mentioned in another thread)
-inverted mode (i.e. ability to go louder in release) i'm not sure if this description works. but i can explain this from the envs of the old yamaha synths, like dx7, where you could say LEVEL=[0-99] for each ADSR step, besides length. the old korg trident had a dedicated switch for inverted envelope and i liked the effect of having the sound grow more after releasing the key very much (which didn't keep me from selling that guy, though).
-separate envelopes for both, filter & volume (separate cycle too) or better yet:
several envelopes that can be routed to different destinations, like filter, volume, pitch, bit rate, jitter, delay and all the other fine features you'll pack into it :-D

edit: of course i forgot it: how about having more steps, not just A,D,S,R. more env steps would also be a fancy feature in cycle mode.
btw all my adsr talking doesn't mean i don't want LFO(s)


  • edited April 2010
    I think just a simple ADSR setup, like the Yamaha VSS-30 and VSS-200 sampling keyboards would work, where you have four buttons to select the ADSR and two buttons to increase or decrease the values (+/- 9 steps). To simplify it even further, you could use one button to cycle through the A-D-S-R settings and two buttons to change the +/- values. Perhaps the +/- value buttons could also be shifted to increase or decrease the volume level of each stage of the envelope, though that begins to get complicated.
  • For the DX7, for example, you've got 4 rate controls and 4 level controls. This would double the number of editable parameters. I guess, if you were clever, you could figure out a way to combine LFO's with the EG so that effectively an ADSR envelope would just be a "one-shot" triggered LFO.
  • i'm thinking of having the sound following the env, and after a while a lfo adds a modulation with depth (speed & waveform) you can choose. this adds much life to a sound. i think such features wouldn't have to be accessible via 1 button press. with permanent storage it would be worth doing such things...
    but i'm no programmer, so i actually don't know whether this is possible at all. like... portamento? polyphony? just kidding
  • Just curious here, but what do people want an ADSR envelope for? The sample?
  • yes. but not necessarily just the volume or filter, which would be regular stuff (but cool, too). when you can route it (in software) to different modulation 'targets' you be able to make some really crazy sounds (at least in my dreams). but i would even use it for volume ctrl, like a slow attack rate or long release and stuff like that.
  • edited April 2010
    Certainly for one-shot samples. Especially those wishing to trigger a sample much in the same way as a pad-based sampler. If, for example, you have a person singing a one second 'Ahhhh' in the key of A and you take that sound and loop it, then you add a slow Attack and a medium release envelope, it would allow for a more natural sound and is great for sculpting loops to make them sound less like a loop when played. The alternative is to store envelopes as presets within WTPA that can be selected via a button-press... but this would bring WTPA closer to becoming just another SK-1, which is what I'm sure Todd is trying to avoid.

    *Edit: Envelopes could be useful when applied to granularized samples, ie: each grain has a basic envelope applied to it in order to sound more organic and less choppy. This could allow for 'softer' sounding grains as well as allowing 'feathered' grains to 'blend' into each other like a sweeping delay effect, or perhaps a space echo-like effect. ADSR Envelopes would also introduce greater dynamics into the playback of loops and perhaps allows for greater blending and 'fading' of loops together, rather than the restrictive 'one loop at a time' approach.
  • I can see envelopes for instrument sampler stuff, but the WTPA isn't that kind of sampler, at least it seems to me. I don't think you can transpose stuff, and it doesn't respond to velocity. Volume and pitch are controlled, on v1, via analog knobs.

    It's more a monophonic (though it has 2 banks), loop type sampler, as opposed to, "sample a voice and play it like an instrument" type sampler.
  • edited April 2010
    yeah, still ;-)

    i mean, putting a filter in it _will_ change it somehow, to sth different than V1. if you add a filter i would recommend implementing envelopes (or sweep) too or would you like to turn the knob always?
    well sounds like i'm trying to persuade people. but i actually wanted to ask.
    so, would you all like to have NO envelopes?

    also i used it in both ways, as a noise machine with a sample running and also midi controlled as a sampled instrument (please don't laugh, i used it e.g. for indian flute sounds :D )
    i promise this was the last edit
  • I personally would never use an envelope. But I was just curious as to how one could use an envelope with it, as I figured the filter thing would've just been a cuttoff filter, and not especially dynamic.
  • I guess I'll throw my 2 cents in here. I think an envelope would be great, especially with a filter. I actually consider it pretty necessary on filters, to me that's what gives filters "life" and make them interesting, otherwise it's just a relatively flat sound with no movement. Of course, if the filter cutoff freq can be controlled by MIDI, something else can act as an envelope, but it would be nice to have one built in.

    At the same time, I think we're getting to the point of feature creep, especially since it sounds like Todd really wants to crank this out quickly.

    But as I said, I do think some basic type of envelope is needed for the filter, and I imagine that these two parts would be designed together. And there are also different ways to do it, while less "controllable," maybe a relatively simple envelope follower could be used with the filter? Or just use an A(S)R design. Also, I agree with the Buchla envelope comment, I've found that one of my favorite uses for my envelopes on my modular are in the loop setting where they just act as LFO's. It's not necessary by any means, but it is a nice feature, and one I thing is especially suited to filters. And also, if you look at most standalone filter units (the sherman filterbank, the schippmann ebbe und flutt, the electrix filter factory, etc) they all have ADSR's or LFO's for this purpose. Again, imo, it's actually the part that makes a filter interesting, otherwise a filter is just a fancy EQ. Also, while not the best way of doing this, a filter with adsr can make a second adsr for a VCA unncessary, as you just use the filter to open and close off the sound.

    As for having an envelope controlling other parameters, I think that's when we're getting into things that may be nice to have, but less necessary and definitely can be controlled by other hardware/software.

    And as to Rodrigo's comment, never say never. :) I think you'd find that envelopes come very much in handy, no matter what type of music you're creating.
  • @didel ... my sentiments exactly. I couldn't imagine using a sampler without an ADSR filter on it. A sample will sound so much better dynamically after you apply an envelope to it. As you so eloquently put it, a sample with a custom envelope really has so much more 'life' to it than a raw clipping of sound. To me, envelopes bring more natural dynamics to a sample and tends to mimic the mechanics of sound better than just a flat, straight chunk of sound. With keyboard-based samplers, I find myself using ADSR at least 80% of the time and with pad-based or loop-based samplers, about 60% of the time.

    The inclusion of ADSR will definitely make WTPA sound less digital and give a more natural, almost analog 'feel' to my samples.
  • I hear what you guys are saying, but I just don't see how it would be used on a loop based, essentially monophonic, sampler.

    But hey, everyone does and likes different things.
  • I trigger one-shot samples all the time using my WTPA, and an envelope on these might be useful. I think you could get some good drum sounds that way.
    Using an envelope when you're using WTPA as a "loop pedal" would be more like a programmable LFO, or complicated tremolo since it would repeat the same way every loop.

    Note, if an ADSR or other type of envelope control DOES happen, you should get this filter business out of your heads.
    Envelope control will apply to sample amplitude (volume) and maybe effects (that would be cool, I think, if there was a control scheme that made sense) but the only filter that will end up in WTPA is the one that's already there -- the sample rate knob :-)

    Programming wise, the sample-by sample math involved with an amplitude envelope will require more ISR screwing around, and is straightforward if not easy per-se.

  • oh so there'll be no analog filter? bummer, but i'll buy it though
  • I'd be happier with an lfo sine /square with a rate and depth control and would use that more than an adsr. Even a square wave chopper of the VCA type would be fine. MIDI clock or divide/multiple clock would be very fancy but a manual rate is good enuff for live for me. I think an adsr is overkill, no offense.
  • Another noob says Hi. I dived into the filter thread because I was thinking a trigger filter would be a useful (though not permanent) complement to the WTPA. I'm interested to see if the McMeat circuit would do the trick. Having owned a Meatball pedal for a while, anything that gets cheerfully close is worth having around. Anyone tried McMeat?

    Anyway, I can understand Todd's reluctance to incorporate an analogue filter: kind of detracts from the charm of the WTPA.


    the very neat resistor chain DAC looks a lot like a ladder from a VCF... hmm diode ladder...

    As for envelopes; yeah, maybe, I need to finish the build and play with the sound. I was thinking a built-in mic for some on the fly musique concrete.
Sign In or Register to comment.