Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

freq2cutoff #35

Open
felixroos opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

freq2cutoff #35

felixroos opened this issue Oct 3, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@felixroos felixroos added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 3, 2024
@ahihi
Copy link
Contributor

ahihi commented Oct 6, 2024

i guess options are

  1. keep it as a separate ugen
    • pros: modularity
    • cons: specific to the current "1-RC and C" filter implementation, not compatible with possible other future filters
  2. add ugens like lpfhz, bpfhz, hpfhz that do the conversion internally
    • pros: can be done for any filter implementation
    • cons: proliferation of ugens
  3. add an optional parameter to the current ugens which toggles the conversion
    • pros: same as 2 but no extra ugens
    • cons: tiny performance hit from always having to check the flag?

@ahihi
Copy link
Contributor

ahihi commented Oct 6, 2024

cons of option 1 might be alleviated by having a clear naming convention for different filter types.. e.g. the existing lpf/bpf/hpf would be of type f and have a conversion function freq2cutf (or something). then for a future type of filter such as 4pole you might have lp4pole/bp4pole/hp4pole and a conversion function freq2cut4pole. idk, maybe the names would get too complicated. just an idea :D

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants