Loopy Pro: Create music, your way.
What is Loopy Pro? — Loopy Pro is a powerful, flexible, and intuitive live looper, sampler, clip launcher and DAW for iPhone and iPad. At its core, it allows you to record and layer sounds in real-time to create complex musical arrangements. But it doesn’t stop there—Loopy Pro offers advanced tools to customize your workflow, build dynamic performance setups, and create a seamless connection between instruments, effects, and external gear.
Use it for live looping, sequencing, arranging, mixing, and much more. Whether you're a live performer, a producer, or just experimenting with sound, Loopy Pro helps you take control of your creative process.
Download on the App StoreLoopy Pro is your all-in-one musical toolkit. Try it for free today.
Comments
There are some ZDF filters already in CSound - and the one he mentions in that paper is I think (don't know the CSound implementation, but pretty sure the algorithm is). It certainly responds like one when you modulate it. But it's not the most sophisticated (read expensive on CPU) design out there.
According to that paper he modified so that it was more like a 303 filter.
As far as I know, at least one of the ZDF implementations in CSound is based on Oli Larkin's version for Max (using Gen). Oli Larkin was the first, developer to create a Yamaha CZ virtual synth (he's very active within the Max community, hence him sharing his Gen dsp for a ZDF design). On that basis I'd expect it to be quite an expensive implementation, not because of Oli's lack of abilities, simply that it's a second generation design.
As for ZDF itself, it can be used to model most filter implementations both real and imagined.
http://www.dafx17.eca.ed.ac.uk/papers/DAFx17_paper_82.pdf
Thanks. It wasn't familiar with this paper. Does anybody know if there's a waveshaper based on this paper in the Reaktor library (Seeing as Julian Parker works for NI)? I'm going to search for it anyway, but I'm being lazy!
They also have written papers about Lockhart and Serge wavefolders
It made for interesting reading, particularly as I own the Softube model of the 259e. Which by coincidence is 4x oversampled internally and I run Softube modular at 96k so it's matching the 8x oversampling quoted in the paper. I'm really happy with the Softube version of the 259e but I've only been exposed to 200e series Buchla systems in the flesh on a few occasions so I couldn't categorically say how close the emulation is to a real 259e. It certainly responds in a similar manner to my mental picture of a 259e.
My favourite aspect of the modelling is that it includes the 259e’s timbre banks A,B and C, that enable a special Memory Scan mode where parts of the 259e internal program memory is played back as audio through the Principal Oscillator outputs. In this mode, Warp sets the scope of swept memory and the FM in knob (Mem Skew) sets the offset (i.e. reference point in memory), where incoming 0V to approximately 6V sweeps the portion of the memory around the set offset. This results in all manner of 'digital gurgles' which can then be wavefolded. Totally unique to the 259e (it's part of where the 'Twisted' part came from in module name 'Twisted Waveform Generator'). As I understand it, the feature was a happy accident, rather than design intent.
There's a strange irony at the heart of that Julian Parker paper. The 259e is a more digital beast than the 259, the digital waveshaping is celebrated for it's aliasing distortion. That coupled with the frankly weird ability to scan the memory locations probably made it an easier target for Softube to model. Softube Modular has to sound good when run at 44.1k (hence the default x4 oversampling). So it makes me wonder whether a 259 model is possible as part of a wider digital modular with today's processing capabilities. Todd Barton and Suzanne Ciani long ago sold their 200 systems and upgraded to 200e based systems so if it's good enough for them, it's certainly good enough for me (even if only in virtual form - not including hardware modular clones).
I think Ciani misses using her 200. She couldn't get it repaired and claims a lot about the 200e is lacking.
Some good general info in her Q+A at Gearslutz:
https://www.gearslutz.com/board/q-a-with-suzanne-ciani/
I had seen that Q&A and didn't read it as a blanket dis of the 200e and she certainly had no bad words to say about the 259e.
Of course there were things that were better about the 200 series but the 200e had many improvements over it's predecessor too.
Apologies, was out for a spot of dinner with my better half, so only just seen your request. Glad Google came to the rescue.
I think the problem with the 200e is that it lacks the interface & visual feedback of the old systems.
The MARF was a big part of how she used the instrument.
This interview (before she got a 200e) explains a bit.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/concert/programmes/hopefulmachines/20130924
Fwiw, a friend whose work centers around Buchlas has said that the Softube 259e is the best software emulation of a Buchla by a fair bit. He also likes their new Buchla module. He prefers the 259 to the 259e--he likes both but has a preference for the 259. He has done a lot work with both.
Listening to the clip that @jonmoore posted I agree it sounds awesome and very Buchla. That was the first time I've heard it and I'm impressed!
@jonmoore : I am not sure how the wavefolding was implemented , but Trevor Gavilan wrote s Buchla-inspired module for Reaktor called Cloudlab 200t. Have you explored it?
No I haven't. Thanks for the info, I'll definitely take a look (hopefully over the weekend).
Something for the weekend:
Not sure if any of you are aware, there's an unofficial VCV Rack build available that works as a VST. It also has a bunch of great customisations of certain Fundamental plugins (the most important of which is the BSP alternative Fundamental VCF).
There's a few hidden gems with regard to wavefolders/waveshapers (the two I use the most are the CF Disto, which has a wonderful interplay between the gain and fold; and the other is the Lindenberg Research Westcoast Complex Shaper, which has 7 different algo's which range from a Serge emulation through to straight up saturation and overdrive).
My favourite feature of this unofficial VST version of Rack is that it has configurable oversampling so you can ramp it up when rendering your stems but not slaughter your CPU whilst tracking.
Also of note, unlike the official distribution it has a ton of presets to explore. Even if you're a seasoned synthesist, it's a great way to explore the library.
It doesn't have everything from the official build but it has most of the important stuff. Anything that's missing you can build yourself if you have the knowhow. One thing I've noticed with recent builds of that you need to ensure you've given apt permissions to everything within the container folder but other than that it's simply a matter of dropping the container folder into you VST folder. Unfortunately it's only available for Windows and Linux.
The following link is the first page of the thread but skip to the end for the latest builds (I'm currently running the May 19th build).
https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=507216
@jonmoore : not related to wavefolding. Have you used the vcvrack Floats module? It is apparently a knock-off of MakeNoise Maths
Yeah, I own it (the price was recently reduced to $10). I does exactly the same thing as Maths and has a few tweaks of it's own too. Bunnies is worth picking up for $10 as well, gets you into 'Source of Uncertainty' territory.
Half the VCV library is a knock-off of some hardware module or other, so I think both Make Noise and the VCV developer created something of a storm in a teacup ref Floats. When it was first released Matthew Friedrichs ripped off the Maths interface as well and that was definitely out of order but Floats seems fair game, and a lot of people purchase hardware modules after first trialing software clones. I now own both a hardware Befaco Rampage and a 4MS PEG having first used the Softube Modular and VCV Rack software versions.
The funny thing with Floats is that I wasn't sure that I needed it in VCV Rack as rack real-estate isn't an issue in the same way that it is on a hardware modular but seeing as Maths was one of the first modules I purchased when putting together my first modular system, a lot of Maths tricks are part of my muscle memory so Floats finds it's way into a lot of my VCV Rack patches at the moment. It might be novelty as I haven't owned it all that long but it responds exactly the way a hardware Maths does.
Isn't Maths a knockoff of Serge and Buchla modules? It seems fair game to me. (Just don't use the ugly MN font.)
I wouldn't say it's a knockoff in the same sense that Floats is pretty much a facsimile of Maths. Function Generators are part and parcel of that 'West Coast' approach but there isn't a Serge or Buchla module where Maths is a direct copy.
If you put it that way, Serge is a knockoff of Buchla.
Maths is a clever package of borrowed ideas. Or a Dual Universal Slope Generator with added attenuverters.