http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QQ4EimOoYo -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
cool app of dsp
Started by ●March 22, 2013
Reply by ●March 22, 20132013-03-22
On 3/22/13 9:27 PM, Randy Yates wrote:> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QQ4EimOoYonice emulation. everything mechanical in the leslie can be modeled pretty straight-forwardly. i wonder how the emulate the tube "drive" function. sounded pretty good. i like how they apologize for it being "digital": "This is a DSP-based pedal meaning it's digital but it sounds really, really nice..." Randy, can you tell me what the difference is between an XK3 and a good ol' B3? just curious. -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> writes:> On 3/22/13 9:27 PM, Randy Yates wrote: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QQ4EimOoYo > > nice emulation. everything mechanical in the leslie can be modeled > pretty straight-forwardly. i wonder how the emulate the tube "drive" > function. sounded pretty good. > > i like how they apologize for it being "digital": "This is a DSP-based > pedal meaning it's digital but it sounds really, really nice..."Yeah, I noticed that too. He also really, really emphasized the bypass was a "true" bypass (with relays).> Randy, can you tell me what the difference is between an XK3 and a > good ol' B3? just curious.I'm not sure at what level you're asking. The obvious, huge differences are a) it's only one keyboard, b) there's no pedalboard (although you may be able to buy a set for it, and c) it's all electronic (no mechanical tonewheels). I've never owned or played one, so I can't really say anything else with any authority. However, by the pictures here: http://hammond-organ.com/Products/XK3.htm I see several similarities: a) a five-octave keyboard like the original, b) the color-reversed preset keys (to the far left), c) two sets of drawbars (the "B" and "Bb" preset keys correspond to these two drawbar sets), d) a vibrator/chorus knob that looks/operates almost identically to the original B3. That's about all I can tell from the pictures. -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
On 3/22/13 11:28 PM, Randy Yates wrote:> robert bristow-johnson<rbj@audioimagination.com> writes: > >> On 3/22/13 9:27 PM, Randy Yates wrote: >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QQ4EimOoYo >> >> nice emulation. everything mechanical in the leslie can be modeled >> pretty straight-forwardly. i wonder how the emulate the tube "drive" >> function. sounded pretty good. >> >> i like how they apologize for it being "digital": "This is a DSP-based >> pedal meaning it's digital but it sounds really, really nice..." > > Yeah, I noticed that too. He also really, really emphasized the bypass > was a "true" bypass (with relays).yeah, i noticed that, too. as if passing the bits over unchanged and suffering the A/D and D/A errors would be noticeable. (if it *is*, then you need better A/D and D/A.)>> Randy, can you tell me what the difference is between an XK3 and a >> good ol' B3? just curious. > > I'm not sure at what level you're asking. The obvious, huge differences > are a) it's only one keyboard, b) there's no pedalboard (although you > may be able to buy a set for it, and c) it's all electronic (no > mechanical tonewheels). >c) is the main thing. i know the XK3 isn't as old as the B3, but i thought it was pretty old, like from the 60s. but i could be very wrong about that. i just don't know. i wonder if the mixing of the virtual tonewheels is done the same as in the B3.> I've never owned or played one, so I can't really say anything else > with any authority. However, by the pictures here: > > http://hammond-organ.com/Products/XK3.htm > > I see several similarities: > > a) a five-octave keyboard like the original, > > b) the color-reversed preset keys (to the far left), > > c) two sets of drawbars (the "B" and "Bb" preset keys > correspond to these two drawbar sets), > > d) a vibrator/chorus knob that looks/operates almost > identically to the original B3. > > That's about all I can tell from the pictures.okay, thanks. -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> writes:> c) is the main thing. i know the XK3 isn't as old as the B3, but i > thought it was pretty old, like from the 60s. but i could be very > wrong about that. i just don't know.I don't think so. I think it came out around the late 90s or so. It's really a whole different beast, technologically.> i wonder if the mixing of the virtual tonewheels is done the same as > in the B3.They probably keep that under tight wraps. -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
This sure beats carrying around a real Leslie from gig to gig as I did in the 70's! Slightly OT .... I always wondered if you could get a real Doppler effect by having a line array of speakers, pointing towards the listener, and cross-fading from one speaker to the next to simulate a moving source. My intuition says that if you played back a sine wave with a wavelength much larger than the speaker spacing, this would work, but I'm not sure this intuition is correct. Even though each individual speaker is not pitch-shifted, a fixed frequency shift is the same as a constantly-increasing phase offset, which the crossfaded line array should provide. Of course, just like the Leslie speaker, you can't keep moving towards the listener forever, so you would need to reverse the direction of the crossfading progression when you reached the end of be array. Bob
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
radams2000@gmail.com writes:> This sure beats carrying around a real Leslie from gig to gig as I did > in the 70's!Bob, You played too? What keyboard(s) did you use? I actually started playing in my first band (professionally, for pay) at 15 with a (get this!) Kimball Swinger! Not exactly a good on-stage, performance organ! Fortunately the leslie made it sound acceptable. Around 10th grade I bought a used Hammond B3 for about $1500, and also a new Minimoog. Man, I loved those! I had a 145 (the short cabinet) for awhile, then upgraded to one of the big leslies: a 910! I always hated the way the lower rotor stopped on slow (chorale) with the 910, though. About 10 years back I bought a 1969 122 off ebay and used it with my VK7 in one short-lived band and a little at church.> Slightly OT .... > > I always wondered if you could get a real Doppler effect by having a > line array of speakers, pointing towards the listener, and > cross-fading from one speaker to the next to simulate a moving source. > My intuition says that if you played back a sine wave with a > wavelength much larger than the speaker spacing, this would work, but > I'm not sure this intuition is correct. Even though each individual > speaker is not pitch-shifted, a fixed frequency shift is the same as a > constantly-increasing phase offset, which the crossfaded line array > should provide. > > Of course, just like the Leslie speaker, you can't keep moving towards > the listener forever, so you would need to reverse the direction of > the crossfading progression when you reached the end of be array.Interesting - my gut tells me that you would NOT get a doppler effect this way. But it's been known to be wrong (quite often). Either way, interesting thought/question. -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> wrote:> radams2000@gmail.com writes:(snip)>> Slightly OT ....>> I always wondered if you could get a real Doppler effect by having a >> line array of speakers, pointing towards the listener, and >> cross-fading from one speaker to the next to simulate a moving source. >> My intuition says that if you played back a sine wave with a >> wavelength much larger than the speaker spacing, this would work, but >> I'm not sure this intuition is correct. Even though each individual >> speaker is not pitch-shifted, a fixed frequency shift is the same as a >> constantly-increasing phase offset, which the crossfaded line array >> should provide.If you fade slowly, say many cycles per transition to the next speaker, then it is just a phase shift at that point. If you fade fast, maybe one cycle through the whole array, then the effect is a continuous phase shift, more or less, like doppler. In the previous discussion of a slowly varying tonal noise, I had wondered about changing the amplitudes of two tonal noise sources, intead of shifting the peak frequency of one. That is, will the human auditory experience be similar.>> Of course, just like the Leslie speaker, you can't keep moving towards >> the listener forever, so you would need to reverse the direction of >> the crossfading progression when you reached the end of be array.> Interesting - my gut tells me that you would NOT get a doppler effect > this way. But it's been known to be wrong (quite often). Either way, > interesting thought/question.-- glen
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
No, I played sax, but when my band needed to get to a gig it was all hands on deck; we even carried a full B3 out of the ratty basement we practiced in! Ah, youth .... I'm still a weekend warrior but long since gave up on making a living at it. Bob
Reply by ●March 23, 20132013-03-23
On 3/23/13 5:18 PM, radams2000@gmail.com wrote:> No, I played sax, but when my band needed to get to a gig it was all hands on deck; we even carried a full B3 out of the ratty basement we practiced in! Ah, youth .... > > I'm still a weekend warrior but long since gave up on making a living at it. >are you still the "Idle Tones"? -- r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
