Maybe flooper would be a good opcode "base" for this kind of thing ?
Oeyvind

2008/1/11, aaron@akjmusic.com <aaron@akjmusic.com>:
> Hi all,
>
> My friend and composer Christopher Bailey has used a technique he and a
> friend call 'boulder' synthesis: instead of looping a sampleduring a
> sustain portion of an envelope, where one can here the artificiality of
> looping points, etc. implement an 'engine' which does everything else a
> sample engine does, except that instead of looping to sustain a note, one
> uses randomized, cross-faded segments of the original sample. This adds a
> more life-like organic realism to a sustained tone when using samples. The
> 'boulder' idea is that this is sort of a larger scale analog to granular
> synthesis. i have been most impressed with the results he has illustrated
> to me. (In fact, I'm amazed that this idea isn't already more widespread,
> even in commercial hardware)
>
> My question--I have an broadly-outlined idea of how to implement this in
> CSound (Chris does it in CMIX) with the diskin opcode, some F-tables to
> match MIDI notes with samples, etc., but might it not be more beneficial
> in the long run to implement this as an opcode, especially if it could be
> built on modifying some existing codebase? Perhaps one could import
> soundfonts, and do everything that the fluidsynth code does, except change
> the looping procedure for sustain parts of the envelope to the above
> described procedure instead.
>
> How easy would this be? I can imagine it would really be a neat addition
> to the CSound arsenal, especially for sample-loving folk. The opcode might
> be called 'fluidboulder', and maybe for non-soundfont based sample work,
> instead of 'loscil' we could have 'boulderoscil' :)
>
> Best,
> AKJ.
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
>