Random Range Module + Slew Limiter Module

[MOTOKO]

Description of feature (short and simple):

1. The user specifies the minimum and maximum values of a range, and when the module receives a trigger signal, it randomly generates values within the user-specified values.

2. Smooth CV changes

How will this feature improve the workflow or experience for all SSP users (keep it short and focused):

Users will be able to control random values, which will create a very effective modulation.

With the addition of the Slew Limiter, the sound design will be very valuable.

[Percussa Forum] Features and Ideas: Random Range Module + Slew Limiter Module

[thetechnobear]

I’ve been thinking about a simple ‘utility’ module recently, that might have these kind of functions … my ideas really have been focused around keeping it ‘modular’ rather than making each function too complex…
(anyone familiar with mutable instruments kinks/links… that kind of thing, but of course its digital, so things are a lot more ‘open’ )

I think a S&H module is definitely a useful feature…
I’m not sure you need a range though, since this can easily be done using a offset/scale - the advantage of this, is it can be applied at input level not just output!
(better for reusing in different parts of a patch)

slew limiters also are cool, actually your description is pretty much a S&G…
but an audio rate slew limiter has other interesting uses.

a couple of things that spring to mind…
can a S&H be achieved using a SWI?
isnt a slew limiter basically a low pass filter? ( assuming the LPF can do DC !)

therefore, can we do NOI-> SWI-> LPF?

that’s not to say, specific modules are not useful … just I find it useful to think of things in context with what we have, to help think what we are ‘missing’.

also of course, whilst its modular to use 3 modules to do something, sometimes its ‘handy’ to have one module to make it easier!.
so I just see it as part of a discussion really…

[Handsonicsuki]

I think you can make a similar function to the random range using @titaanzink 's tips.

I made S&H synced with gate using that tips.

Sample and Hold

While playing around with the ARP module the other day, I realised that the arpeggiator picks a value from its input as the starting point to step through its arpeggiator steps until it gets told to look at its input again and pick a new input value. It dawned on me that that is very similar to how a sample & hold works. When leaving the Step value to 0, the Length to 1 and hooking up a random input, the ARP works as a sample and hold. In the attached preset, the elements on Page 1 provide the…

[titaanzink]

Hi @MOTOKO, as @Handsonicsuki said, [1] look at my Sample And Hold patch. That will give you the idea for creating a random signal upon trigger. Then use the offset and scale parameters to massage it into the range you require. [2] The Slew is a challenge indeed! I’ll have a think if and how that can be achieved…

[Handsonicsuki]

My S&H-like function setting is as below.
Sorry for awful hand-drawing!

ARP setting
STEP value: 0
Length: 1
Ratio : 0.01

Setting ARP’s ratio to the minimum is for preventing ARP move the next step before ARP get a reset gate signal.

In this S&H-like setting, it might occur misfire the random CV with unintended timing when the gate signal interval is changed from very short to long.

[MOTOKO]

I hope the utility module you are thinking about will be released. As you said, it is important to focus on ‘modular’. But of course, digital seems to be very scalable.

And I should test it with NOI -> SWI -> LPF. Thank you for the tip.

Yes, I think it’s good to use three modules, but I think it’s also efficient to do it with one module. As expected, this is likely to be part of the discussion.

[MOTOKO]

Thank you for your preset and explanation! I’ll take a look at it and test it.

[MOTOKO]

Thank you for your wonderful hand-drawing and explanation! I’ll test and study your tips.

[thetechnobear]

actually i think SWI wont work… I was thinking when you switch to an new output, it would keep its ‘existing’ value, but I suspect it’ll just reset to zero.

so @titaanzink suggestion with the ARP is the way forward…
so
NOI->ARP-> LPF

note: the lpf would have to have a really low (=slow) cutoff value - you might need to feed this in via CV, and scale the value down (as there is no fine tune on cutoff on the SVF?!)

but yeah, probably a stop gap… I’ll definitely consider a proper S&H module, and try to remember to have some kind of glide… either on it, or another module.

[MOTOKO]

@thetechnobear

actually i think SWI wont work… I was thinking when you switch to an new output, it would keep its ‘existing’ value, but I suspect it’ll just reset to zero.

so @titaanzink suggestion with the ARP is the way forward…
so
NOI->ARP-> LPF

Thank you. I’m going to do some research with the presets shared by @titaanzink.

@thetechnobear

note: the lpf would have to have a really low (=slow) cutoff value - you might need to feed this in via CV, and scale the value down (as there is no fine tune on cutoff on the SVF?!)

I see. I think we need a fine tune to adjust SVF.

@thetechnobear

but yeah, probably a stop gap… I’ll definitely consider a proper S&H module, and try to remember to have some kind of glide… either on it, or another module.

I’m really looking forward to it if you develop them. Thank you very much!

[titaanzink]

@thetechnobear - I was planning to try your suggestion of using an LPF with a very low cutoff value to create a slew effect, but realised that it Fc only works in steps of 20Hz. However, when I looked at your sample patch for the RNGS module, you use an SVF before the RVB set at a cutoff frequency of 0.1 Hz. How did you achieve that setting? When I insert a new SVF, the only selectable (with encoder) values are 0Hz- 20HZ - 40 Hz and all the way to 5000Hz. In the SVF in your patch however the possible values are 0.1Hz - 20Hz - etc…
Would you care to share the secret?

[thetechnobear]

odd - SVF lowest cutoff always is 0.1 for me ?!

What I was suggesting above, was to use try to use cv input to get it even lower.
Often on the SSP it’s the UI that has these limits and stepping of values - for ease of use, but cv inputs are less restrictive