Page 3 of 3

Re: The old but never satisfyingly answered question

PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2019 3:58 pm
by trogluddite
Spogg wrote:Dare we conclude that cross-fading is type of morphing, or should I duck for cover?

It should only called cross-fading once the controversy has made everyone cross enough! [ducking] :lol:

tulamide wrote:...the second is a blend...

For a concise control name, I find "blend" very fitting - descriptive and suggesting something slightly more involved than a static oscillator "mix".

tulamide wrote:trog just gave the ultimate answer: a big knob labelled "morph"

If not quite as succinctly as Adam's visuals! I'm a great believer in the old saying; "1000 words is worth a picture!" (or is it the other way around?) :lol:

Re: The old but never satisfyingly answered question

PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:51 pm
by MichaelBenjamin
idk but this sounds just like plain amplitude modulation, did i miss something?

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques ... modulation

seems the rule to get the highest generated freq (with sines) is just to sum it.
so a 500hz sine osc modulated with a sine at 1000 hz will give freqs to max 1500hz

if you crossfeed i'd guess it doesn't matter, and you can calculate just by taking the highest freq of each stream.
so if you amplitude mod a bandlimited sr/2 square with 500hz sine, then you overshoot/alias by 500hz

Re: The old but never satisfyingly answered question

PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:26 pm
by RJHollins
.... and of course, I hesitate the mention of:

'Dissolve' :P