optionally a possibility to choose how the modulation should behave (unipolar, bipolar).
Are there any workarounds?
Depending on exact effect you can try to use the envelope or step fx to get a similar sound, but neither of these way are as ‘simple’ as being able to set the LFO ‘base’ to 100% but then only allowing for 2% modulation around that, for example
Any links to related discussions?
Any references to other products?
One example from another tracker is renoise’s built in LFO plugin, it has an ‘offset’ slider so that you can ‘move’ the modulation to effect a different range of the value, for example a low amplitude but high offset lfo means it will be a very weak lfo, but the value will change around 90-100%, or you can move the offset all the way to 0, meaning the same very weak lfo will move the value around 0-10% instead, allowing one simple lfo to subtly modulate completely different sets of values depending on what’s needed (this can also be useful for modulating the different filters in polyend tracker, for example, as some applications will need cut off high and some will need it low)
Hi @smt , thanks for your wish, but this is how current implementation works. LFO is bipolar already and works exactly as @Sandroid described in the comment. Could you point us to a specific use case where you’re having problems with LFO being unipolar? Thank you
huh, I suppose to be specific, I can’t find how I would set the instrument LFO to modulate the volume subtly? at 100% ‘lfo amount’ the effect is between no volume and max, and at 0-10% the LFO effect on volume is that it modulates a small amount but around ‘no volume’ so that I can’t really hear it, my desired outcome, however it’s worded, is that I could set the LFO to subtly modulate the volume but around it’s max volume (slight tremolo)
i have drawn an extremely crude example of what I mean, I believe the bottom example currently isn’t possible with LFO as it only has an ‘amount’ value with no ability to set the point at which that value oscillates around, I might be wrong though, but I can’t figure it out if i am
@smt thanks for explaining, the picture makes it clear. But I think the proposal has to be rephrased to reflect this. Please update the draft, especially title to make it more clear and we’ll review it again, thanks
I believe I’m currently unable to edit it but if a mod wants to set the title to something like “Allow instrument LFO modulation to be offset by a value” or something like that, I think that’s the simplest way to phrase it
Is this only applicable to the volume LFO? The other modulation targets seem to work as expected.
Also, when I read “LFO offset” I think of LFO phase offset.
you’re right my specific issue is for volume just cause I think that’s basically “missing” a feature to not be able to choose whether you’re slightly oscillating quiet or loud, im sure there’s uses for it on basically every LFO target though
and you’re right with the name, im not sure what the best name for it would be
I mean, from my testing the other mod targets don’t suffer from this issue. They take into account the value set within the instrument. If the instrument panning set to 0 and pan LFO amount set to 50 it will move from -25 (left) to 25 (right). If panning set to -25, it will then move from - 50 (ful left) to 0 (center). The same for cutoff and wavetable/granular position LFOs. It’s only the volume LFO that behaves strangely, as it adds modulation to zero rather than to the instrument’s volume. Or maybe I somehow don’t get what this wish is about at all?
I came from Bitwig Studio which has the best modulation system in the whole universe. None of Bitwig’s numerous modulation devices have value offsets in them.
That’s why I was wondering what is an LSO offset.
I opened up Renoise to see what it actually is. I’ve set up two LFOs modulating the same parameter (track volume). Turns out LFOs in Renoise take an absolute control over the parameter they’re modulating. Of the two LFOs the one that’s placed later in the device chain wins and the other one is totally ignored. No matter what value you set in the mixer track’s volume as LFO takes full control over it. That’s where offset comes in handy as it defines a parameter’s base value. For ‘absolute’ modulation offset is a must indeed.
For additive modulation, where modulation range is defined as original value +/- modulation amount offsets don’t make much sense. All LFOs in the Tracker are additive except for volume by some reason. What’s the point if, let’s say, you set WT position to 0 and WT Pos LFO offset to 100? Just set WT pos to 100 in the first place with the same effect. Having both would be just confusing.
Sorry for such a long message, I was just browsing the wishlist to see where to spend my precious votes and once again stumbled across this one and realised I still don’t get it. Needs a little rework I think so it focuses on the specific use case with volume modulation.
I think this is a very useful wish. Because of the current LFO Behaviour i don’t use Volume LFO at all. The Workaround for me is using step fx volume. Or even copy the intrument several times and having different volumes on each. Changin the LFO behaviour like described in this wish would be absolutely superb ! Voted !
