Are modulated parameters smoothed?

[gavspav_2]

I have 2 clips in a track both containing clip envelopes linked to a common parameter in M4L.

If I play one clip and then switch to the other the modulated parameter value moves slowly towards its new level (ie the value set by the clip envelope in the new clip)

I just want the parameter to reflect the value declared in my clip envelope.

There must be a way of turning this smoothing off?

Anyone know what I'm on about?

[gavspav_2]

Quite confused by this now as it seems to be behaving inconsistently.

Here's an example patch will will hopefully work - ha ha.

http://www.digitalfunfair.co.uk/smoothing.zip

If you play the first clip and let the modulated value get to at least 0.1

Then fire the second clip and the value will go backwards till it gets down to the correct value.

Let this new (second) clip get to at least 0.1 again.

Trigger the first clip - the modulated value goes straight down to zero.

Am I missing something or is this the work of the devil?

[gavspav_2]

Hmm pretty sure this is a bug now.

Can anyone confirm before I report it?

Or even confirm if my post is intelligible!?

[ztutz]

Is the set file missing from your zip? I get a project file with no set when I open it.

[gavspav_2]

Oh God Sorry about that and thanks for looking.

I've fixed the link now.

http://www.digitalfunfair.co.uk/smoothing.zip

Trigger the first clip and the param value starts from zero straight away.
Trigger the second and it slides down towards zero.

[pukunui]

I can reproduce this.

I'll look into it and get back to you

-A

[pukunui]

Ok this looks like a bug. Thanks very much for the report, we'll get to it.

-A

[gavspav_2]

Can you tell me which the bug is exactly?

Is it that the modulated parameter value starts from the new value immediately ie without smoothing), or that if the control value changes significantly the parameter is smoothed?

I realise that a physical controller such as a slider or dial cannot move from say 0 to 127 without passing all the values in between.

However I do want this behaviour

[pukunui]

Maybe both. We are trying to do some kind of smoothing, but in the 2nd case it seems to be too slow.

-A

[gavspav_2]

OK well feature request for smoothing being optional then!

Here's a couple of examples where smoothing might not be desirable:

i)If you're feeding M4L clip position data via a modulated parameter (if we havent got access to clip position through the API this might still turn out to be the best way)

ii)If you have two separate clips with different modulated effects and you want a fast cut from one to the other.I don't want some smoothing I can't turn off. If I want smoothing I'll draw a clip envelope - or program it in a patch!

[ztutz]

+1 on no voodoo smoothing

If I want to lowpass my control signal, I'm happy to do it myself!

Optional 'sok, I guess...

[gavspav_2]

Also wouldn't it make weird things happen when you're looping?

[gavspav_2]

Two updates now and the smoothing issues haven't been resolved!
As its just taken me the best part of a day for me to carry out a minor update to my website I'm not complaining.
Just wondering what the score is with it though.
Or if there is a workaround!

Gavin

[pukunui]

It will be addressed by us soon.

-A

[zlatko]

+1 for optional smoothing,
you can please regard the m4l community knowing how to lag their control signals.

cheers

z