Quote:
Originally Posted by Casey  Try 10ms at 2 Hz Tap spacing should be such that there is a good chance that the delay between taps can be seen as enough to assure decorrelated signals. Statistically it turns out that 50ms or more will work on average over many tap pairs. Without statistical deccorelation you will have, as you have found, very strong comb filtering effects. |
Perhaps that is why an algorithm that sounds good at as big of a setting as possible may sound good, but as the size goes down, the combing gets worse? Would I be smart to fade taps out (so they drop out gradually) at small sizes? A tap spacing of 50-80ms at canyon size becomes 5ms in a smallish living room. Keeping the same amount of chorus becomes much more noticeable in a small size. A 50ms tap spacing would result in a 20 Hz peak which is nice and low. At 5ms it gets to be 200 Hz - mudfest.
Or should I be looking at changing the tap gains - rather than trying to get a smooth decay, try to reduce combing by alternating and modifying tap gains somehow? I've been adjusting them for a smooth decay at canyon sizes so far. I would think that alternating tap gain signs would change the combing but maintain the density - maybe to half the frequency? What about applying acoustical diffusor patterns to the tap gains, spacings, and signs? Those equations are pretty well known, and I think I have them in an acoustic design book I have somewhere.