Robin Schmidt

> Maybe it makes more sense to do 0 as on target and 1 as most off target? i would say perhaps it's better to go from -1..+1 indicating also...

then just take the absolute value. in other situations, the direction of the deviation may matter. so, your formula would be: `deviation = abs(quantized-original)/quantizationStepSize // or maybe times 2?` i...

..but i think i'll also make an "abs" module, so the formula can then also be implemented by connecting subtract, abs and divide modules appropriately (but i guess, a formula...

i totally agree with that (less wires -> more convenient, probably also more efficient) the formula module will be based on the same expression evaluator engine as func-shaper, which is...

ok - but you will then have to explain some more what exactly you are actually doing and what is going wrong because i didn't understand a thing. ...but then,...

ahh...ok - so you are time-aligning various different samples of the same instrument (at the same pitch), so they can be played simultaneously without phase cancellation issues. ...yeah - makes...

hmm...well...it's not straightforward. possible - maybe - but then perhaps a totally different implementation would be preferable. as it works now, i compute some time-related coefficients at each breakpoint and...

for example, the exponential shape is just generated by a simple 1st order filter, the tanh-shape by two 1st order filters - one of them being *unstable* :-O (combining exponential...

aha! yes - i must think about how to create such a curve. maybe a simple crossfade between exp and linear would do. another interesting curve results from adding two...

i added it to rosic.cpp. this is actually the place where template instantiations should go