PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

rhythmaster wrote:The thing is that it appeared suddenly.

Most error messages do...... .......and they're awful

dante wrote:Yes, everything to do with a delay needs memory, but the question is 'how much' - do you really need to store each and every reflection ?

If you have a source sound 'A' its possible to calculate the first reflection 'B' and then the second reflection 'C'. But do you need three seperate RAM chunks for these 3 ?

To be true, I don´t know if both is necessary technically, I only assume it is.
There might be several solutions constructing reverbs, room simulators, complex delay machines etc. and for sure there are solutions saving CPU cycles and memory access cycles, but I have no clue how these really work and who´s using ´em in which already existing machines, algorythms, native plugins or DSP devices.

dante wrote: Since the sum of 'A' and 'B' can be stored in the same amount of RAM as 'A' theres no need to keep 'A' and 'B' in memory seperately any more before calculating 'C' - isn't it ?

As I said,- I don´t know.
I imagine a single reflection bouncing back from one direction doesn´t keep a single reflection because it bounces back and forth between all sides, the ceiling and floor of a (virtual) room and there are many of these doing this and all have a different operational life and change tonal characteristics over time,- to me, that´s very complex ...
I also have no idea how much storage capacity is necessary to create dense reverb clouds and tails or dense early reflection clusters.

dante wrote: Its a bit like 'bouncing' on the old 4 track machines. Once you bounce Track 1 and 2 together onto track 3, then tracks 1 & 2 can be re-used.

Take the Roland Space echo for example. If you wanted 'denser' echos, you turned up the speed, but the tape itself didn't need to 'grow'

You might look at this from a different perspective,- let´s say,- the relatively large tape loop of a Roland Space Echo (I had a RE501 in the past) was long enough for what the machine was constructed.
When the speed increased, it ran faster between the defined playback heads and the record head, that´s all.
The overall storage capacity of the tape kept the same, but wasn´t used completely in most cases except at fastest possible speed of the tape eventually.
OTOH, you´re right,- when the tape passed the erase head, the storage capacity was available again.
And there is the feedback loop electronically and that is eventually matching your idea of the calculation from input to output every time the in complexity growing signal structure passes the record and playback heads again, runs thru the feedback loop again and so on.

dante wrote: A better album name here : 'The Growing Tape Loop Time Bandits'

- now we have 2 album ideas already to work on w/ XITE machines and SCOPE.
How will it sound when tape loops grow while the music recorded is running,- combined w/ a moving playback head like the Maestro Echoplex offered ?

And now we have album title #3: "Multiple Pitch Shift Climax in anechoic Space"



Bud