I’ll test some more with APan and come up with the simplest case that demonstrates the issue. It could be user error.
Any idea if IDAM can be setup as more than stereo? Was kind of hoping there was a clever trick to send four channels to AUM but if I could send it to the Mac via IDAM that would be an option for exploring.
I want to capture 4 channels of audio to disk so that the two sets of audio pairs can receive different reverb/room simulations. I don’t suppose Audulus supports Audiobus 3 (which allows apps to have multiple audio output channels). For instance Loopy can send each of its loops to separate channels in apps (such as AUM that support Audiobus 3).
Audulus supports both IAA and Audiobus 3, however it only offers two channels of I/O in either environment. Both Audiobus and IAA can support multiple channels so I’m hoping that Audulus will offer more than two at some point. Currently running stand-alone is the only way to get more than two channels of I/O in Audulus on iOS. Of course you could use a multi-channel audio interface on the iPad and one on the Mac.
AB3 allows for more than 2 audio channels. Both LayR Multi-Timbral (an awesome synth) and Loopy can send out multiple audio channels. I use that feature quite a bit. If Taylor isn’t aware of this, it might be something not too difficult to add.
Has anyone created a module that takes a mono audio input and lets you position the audio in quad so that if you take a knob from 0 to 1, it will move the sound so that it starts at output 1 when the knob is at 0 and travels across the speakers till it finally comes back to output 1 (from output 4) when the knob is full up?
I think @espiegel123 is talking about a 4 way pan. 1 audio signal in, panning from 1 to 2 to 3 to 4 to 1. It should be possible to cascade modified sine/cosine pans to build a quad pan.
A more useful setup might be a 2d pan. A single control can only position a sound on the perimeter whereas a 2d pan can position a sound anywhere on the plane. Since we don’t have an x-y controller in Audulus you would have to use two separate knobs (left/right & front/back)
I am currently using a left/right and front/back pair for my (totally phony but still fun) pseudo-quad module (basically front/back fading uses reverb as moving something into the faux distance). But, as I’ve thought about it, I was thinking that there are times when it would be useful to have a single knob variation that moves a sound around the perimeter (when I get an actual multioutput setup so that I could do could.
I can imagine using both types of controls for moving a sound in space depending on the situation. In the case of a knob that moves the sound on the perimeter, one could have another knob that controls distance. So, knob 1 is angle and knob 2 is radius. If that makes sense.
Btw, I think Mark (@biminiroad) might have been responding to a question higher up the thread where I was asking about how to have a knob so that it progressively adds four processes/sources as it is cranked up rather crossfading 1 to 2 to 3 to 4.
That application is for a situation (lets say wavefolding) that as you crank up a ‘wavefolding/overtones’ knob you can have additional processes kick in as you crank up your knob rather than crossfading between them.
It is hard for me to describe since I don’t yet know what the processes are. What made me think of it is that Tony Rolando talks about the Multiply circuit in the 0-Coast as bringing in up to five square waves to active on the signal – and you notice as you crank up the 0-Coast’s Multiply that you get an interesting cascading of overtones that sounds different from a lot of other wavefolders. And the Buchla Timbre control has an interesting impact different from other wavefolders that I was wondering if I could simulate by stacking some additional processes on to the basic wavefolding algorithm. I guess one could do it by having expression nodes in front of each of the processes so that each one only kicks in when a certain knob threshold is reached and mix the results.
Angle and radius sounds like a good combination. That would give you a perimeter pan and still let you select an arbitrary position if desired. A linear control would be fairly straightforward, but it would be better to maintain equal loudness. I was messing around with modifying an equal power sine/cosine pan yesterday, but it was getting pretty messy so I decided that I needed to re-think my approach. This could be a bit simpler way to visualize the problem.
I haven’t gotten as far in polishing Buchaudulus as I’d hoped, but it might still be of interest. What topic should I post it in. I’ll post both the core Buchaudulus and helper patches and a few demo patches along with some usage notes but won’t have a full documentation page.
Thanks, Mark. I was concerned about posting it there because the posting guidelines say that it should be finished – and while BA is finished in the sense that it can be used to great effect – it is pretty unpolished (lots of inputs/outputs not labeled with ‘o’ ‘a’ and the like.
But if that is ok, I’ll post it to modules/synth-voice – and you can recategorize if appropriate.