Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: Combine tuning offset fields

Combine tuning offset fields 1 year 10 months ago #1

  • Dan Eble
  • Dan Eble's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 9
It feels unnatural to have to set a value in the "Tuning (cents)" field separately from the "Tuning (semi-tones)" field. It would be simpler to have one field and take the cents from after the decimal point. For example, instead of this:
Tuning (semi-tones)9
Tuning (cents)61

this:
Tuning (semi-tones)9.61

Thank you.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Combine tuning offset fields 1 year 10 months ago #2

  • Davy
  • Davy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Organ enthusiast and creator of Polyphone
  • Posts: 171
  • Thank you received: 37
Hello Dan, welcome on the forum :)

Thank you for this good suggestion for the editing in the table (for instruments or presets), this would remove one row. The ticket is here.

But just to make it clear for the sample level: both "root key" and "correction" are needed. In particular cases you may want the sample to match a specific key X and add or remove more than 1 semi-tone with the correction.

Davy
Last Edit: 1 year 10 months ago by Davy.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Combine tuning offset fields 1 year 10 months ago #3

  • Dan Eble
  • Dan Eble's Avatar
  • Offline
  • New Member
  • Posts: 9
Would combining those tuning fields reduce the range of things that can be accomplished in presets or modulators? 9.6 could be either 9+0.6 or 10-0.4. Are there any scenarios in which there is a practical difference between those?
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Combine tuning offset fields 1 year 5 months ago #4

  • Davy
  • Davy's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Organ enthusiast and creator of Polyphone
  • Posts: 171
  • Thank you received: 37
My answer 4 months later ;)

Internally there will still be 2 variables due to the sf2 format, one for the coarse tuning and one for the fine tuning. Graphically this will be merged and the more logical way to split the value is to use the range [-0.5; +0.5[ for the fine tuning and compute the coarse tuning based on this.

If we understand this, I see two problems:
  • a modulator modify one variable and we may want the coarse tuning or the fine tuning to be driven
  • limits for each variable may have to be taken into account

For example we could use on purpose -100 for a fine tuning and add a modulator whose range will be [+0; +200] for the fine tuning. We could also imagine a weird instrument whose tune is modified semi-tones by semi-tones with a modulator.

My conclusion is thus: merging both fine and coarse tuning would result in less possibilities and would need an update to the format regarding how the modulators work. Such an update would lead to old soundfonts being not compatible anymore (only in very rare cases but the risk exists).
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Time to create page: 0.110 seconds