Page 1 of 2

Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 12:20 pm
by flucatcher
I am working on a polyphonic version of the wavetable oscillator. I will do what I can to optimize the code to reduce CPU usage but heavy use of the stack options (adding additional detuned or phased voices) opens up for VERY high CPU.

The mono version can give you between 1 (one oscillator, no stacking) to up to 10 voices (two oscillators, 5 stack on both oscillators). The same for a polyphonic version would increase that to up to 160 voices (and at the same time speed up climate change.)

I have a couple of options:
1) Accept high CPU usage and leave it up to the users to tweak polyphony, stacking and active oscillators based on their needs and the power of their computer.
2) Reduce stacking to 2 per oscillator.
3) Remove stacking altogether.

Personally I prefer option 1 since it leave the decision to the user. Would for example allow someone to use 1 oscillator with 4 stacking and 6 voice polyphony.

I am curious of what:
1) potential users would prefer
2) cherry audio would prefer

Regards
Tobias (weevil)

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:50 pm
by fourways
In my opinion the best will be option 1. I have quite powerful computer, so I don't want to limit myself if I have enough power. Anybody who find stacking a resource hog could always disable stacking or use lower amount of voices.

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2020 6:51 pm
by martb
fourways wrote:
Fri Jan 10, 2020 2:50 pm
In my opinion the best will be option 1. I have quite powerful computer, so I don't want to limit myself if I have enough power. Anybody who find stacking a resource hog could always disable stacking or use lower amount of voices.
+1

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2020 3:24 am
by gone soft
I certainly agree to keep the present up to 5 voice stacking also for the poly. Add some warning somewhere that it might get CPU intensive if you find some convenient way of doing so and noone should have much to complain about, it's an option and not mandotory to use it. ;)

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:14 am
by flucatcher
Thanks for the feedback! The polyphonic version is available in the store now with a 2 week release sale:
$20 for the polyphonic version
$25 for the bundle (poly + mono)
$10 for the bundle (poly + mono) if you already have the mono version

As always, feedback on improvement is always welcome.

Regards
Tobias

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 12:16 pm
by fourways
Great, thank you Tobias! Will buy today :)

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 2:36 pm
by Ian Craig
Hi,

the more options the better, with all modules, by everybody. The possible addition (I haven't checked the module yet) of a button to switch on, via a drag down menu or something, an available choice of CPU viable scenarios to enable a bypass of full choices and simplify usage for different user types i.e. those that want to play single instruments versus those of us who wanted 45 instruments running simultaneously but would still like the opportunity to use the module. I hope this helps with module creator's understanding. Thanks for your attention. :)

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2020 4:30 pm
by fourways
flucatcher wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:14 am
Thanks for the feedback! The polyphonic version is available in the store now with a 2 week release sale:
$20 for the polyphonic version
$25 for the bundle (poly + mono)
$10 for the bundle (poly + mono) if you already have the mono version

As always, feedback on improvement is always welcome.

Regards
Tobias
It was a big fun to play with poly version, already bought it. Is there "stereo width" knob when stacking and detuning or I'm missing something? It will be highly useful for me, hopeful not so hard to implement. Also, please consider "previous" and "next" wavetable buttons in the folder. I know there is not so many space left, but probably two small "<" and ">" signs still will fit? Probably even on the bottom right of the waveform display?

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 12:05 pm
by flucatcher
Ian Craig wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 2:36 pm
Hi,

the more options the better, with all modules, by everybody. The possible addition (I haven't checked the module yet) of a button to switch on, via a drag down menu or something, an available choice of CPU viable scenarios to enable a bypass of full choices and simplify usage for different user types i.e. those that want to play single instruments versus those of us who wanted 45 instruments running simultaneously but would still like the opportunity to use the module. I hope this helps with module creator's understanding. Thanks for your attention. :)
I think a "settings" option for all modules that:
a) keeps default settings that stay for the module regardless of patch
b) allows patch specific overrides
would be really good.

Cherry audio, see this as a feature request :)

Re: Poly Wavetable Oscillator

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2020 12:08 pm
by flucatcher
fourways wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 4:30 pm
flucatcher wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:14 am
Thanks for the feedback! The polyphonic version is available in the store now with a 2 week release sale:
$20 for the polyphonic version
$25 for the bundle (poly + mono)
$10 for the bundle (poly + mono) if you already have the mono version

As always, feedback on improvement is always welcome.

Regards
Tobias
It was a big fun to play with poly version, already bought it. Is there "stereo width" knob when stacking and detuning or I'm missing something? It will be highly useful for me, hopeful not so hard to implement. Also, please consider "previous" and "next" wavetable buttons in the folder. I know there is not so many space left, but probably two small "<" and ">" signs still will fit? Probably even on the bottom right of the waveform display?
Hi, yep, will check next and previous wavetable, there is space and isnt tricky to implement. No stereowidth implemented (and only mono out for the mix at this point.) I will add this to the feature request list.