GUI design: adventures in Blender.

Bolle

View A of the Beezlebaum is basically finished.

Subtractive mono synth with:

• Two Moog Voyager style 'Continuos Variable Waveshape' oscillators. One of which has Frequency control.
• Noise Oscillator
• Glide control
• LP filter with Envelope Amount and LFO Amount control. Envelope Amount can be positive<>negative. LFO Amount is really an amplitude control for the LFO. This way the modulation amount stays the same across the Envelope curve.
• Filter Envelope
• Amp Envelope
• LFO with Frequency control, Waveform select and Tempo Sync.
• Drive/distortion control. Sets the amount of pre-filter distortion.
• Output volume.

If you want you can download the test version here:

Beezlebaum test v1_0.zip

Let me know what you think. Tips, improvements, feature ideas...

View B will likely be a virtual FX pedal board with a small range of FX, and perhaps a small section of additional Beezlebaum controls.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Different colour. Might go with this. A little more of that old audio test equipment vibe.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Hmmm.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Done.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

The Beezlebaum is available for download in the User Library.

Subtractive mono synth with two Continuous Variable Wave Shape Oscillators.

Started while shaping waves, combining oscillators and filtering. Then combining those waves into a Moog Voyager style Continuous Variable Wave Shape Oscillator. One knob. All the waves.

It does not sound the same as a Moog Voyager oscillator. It's a similar concept, that is all.

Features:

• Two Continuous Variable Wave Shape Oscillators. Both with Level and Wave Shape control. One has Frequency control.
• Noise Oscillator with Level control.
• Glide control.
• 24db/Oct LP filter with Cutoff and Resonance control, EG Amount (negative/positive) and LFO Amount control.
• LFO with Frequency and Wave Select control. Sync-able to tempo.
• ADSR Filter Envelope.
• ADSR Amp Envelope.
• Distortion/Drive control (wired pre-filter)

That's it. Simples.

It has a bunch of unorthodox building methods, and a few niggles here and there, but as far as i can tell everything works.

Known issues (some of which i need help fixing, thanks in advance):

• When VCO II Detune = 0, it is synced to VCO I. This is audible but not a real issue. After detuning and returning to equal pitch, the oscillators would be out of phase otherwise.
• Every now and then, the oscillators experience initialisation issues and go ever so slightly out of phase, just a tiny tiny bit, even when VCO II detune = 0. This can be remedied by turning the "Run Audio" power button in the top right corner of Reaktor off and on again. As far as i can tell it only happens after editing the internal structure, or when Reaktor is left idle for a while.
• The Oscillator Waveform controls can be a little jumpy around the 3.0 (square) point. Beyond this point the narrowing of the Pulse Width starts and this can some times produce an audible jump.

Possible future updates include redoing the oscillators in Core and updating the filter. View B could be where i put some FX. We'll see.

Just a quick handful of snapshots.

Please feel free to post update and/or feature suggestions.

Get it here: https://www.native-instruments.com/en/reaktor-community/reaktor-user-library/entry/show/14931/

Greets,

Bolle

Big Gnome

Looking beautiful--reminds me of something Bruel & Kjaer would've designed in the late 60's.

Bolle

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/84709#Comment_84709

Thank you. That's the look i was going for. 60's test- and broadcast equipment.

Bolle

(EDIT: never mind, phasing of two or more Beezlebaum tracks in a DAW is not a big problem unless two tracks play the exact same sequence/pitch).

Added a short audio demo to the User Library. This thing sounds wicked. Especially for its simplicity.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Thinking of adding 'Control Shaper 3' modules to almost every control of the Beezlebaum. I don't like Reaktor's standard logarithmic control curve one bit.

Downside is that i have to give every knob 0... 1 values and then apply the math for each one of them to get the right outcome for whatever they control. Lots of knobs. Lots of different values. Then i have to recreate every snapshot i've saved so far.

This graph is for guitar electronics potentiometers. I mimicked the reverse log curve and tried it on the Oscillator Level controls. Feels a lot more natural to me. The blue dotted line represents the values i've entered at each breakpoint.

Thoughts? Worth the effort?

EDIT: Turns out not to be a very good idea for the Filter- and Envelope controls. They really like the standard logarithmic curves for control values. Filter behaves very different with inverse log curves. Only going to apply them to the oscillator level controls and to output volume control.

Greets,

Bolle

Murat Kayi

Hey @Bolle love the look of the Beezlebaum! Now, I also took the time to listen to the audio example in the user library and it sounds awesome! Will definitely download this beauty and give it a try

Apart from the sounds I also just liked the music in the audio example!

Bolle

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/85477#Comment_85477

Thank you kindly!

colB

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/85422#Comment_85422

Yes, it's worth the effort, however, as you have discovered, you really need to fine tune the curves per parameter to get the most out of it, and that requires testing in different scenarios / use cases.

0..1 for base knobs is the best though - because then you can use cheap curves that work well for some things. Basically square or cube the 0..1 value, or for inverse 1-((1-knob)*(1-knob)*... etc...). You can use sections of that polynomial curve too by pre and post scaling and offsetting..

I use parameterised log and exp type curves, cheap polynomial type curves, and also piecewise curves. They all have their place. Sometimes the piecewise curves have linear sections, sometimes they have sections with different polynomial or exp/log based curves.

e.g. I have a piecewise one where the first part of the knobs range increases logarithmically with a pitch based curve, while the second part scales dynamically based on another parameter in the system (this is on the 'grain size' control for a granular engine).

Also other fun stuff like knobs that have 'notches', so they 'grab' a bit at important values, making it much easier to find e.g. exactly half the frequency and quarter... or related delay times etc... So many things to play with in terms of complex control design.

Bolle

https://community.native-instruments.com/discussion/comment/85521#Comment_85521

As always, gonna keep it very simple. Reverting all filter and envelope controls back to direct connection with previous values and standard control curve. Keeping the inverted log curves on the oscillator levels, drive control and output level.

There's a real sweet spot for the filter, with the standard control curves, that i'm afraid of losing if i do it any other way. I really love how this thing sounds, and i don't want to mess with that.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Anybody want a Beezlebaum phone background? 😆

I made this render for an Instagram reel / audio demo.

Greets,

Bolle

Bolle

Added another audio demo to my User Library post of the Beezlebaum. I'm having so much fun with this, it's ridiculous. It sounds killer.

You can listen to the audio demo's here: https://www.native-instruments.com/en/reaktor-community/reaktor-user-library/entry/show/14931/?_ga=2.34449057.1640889330.1686074983-1858427177.1660524069

Currently finishing up the build with the alternative control curves.

Future edits / features could be smoothing out the (some times) jumpy bit of the Wave Shape controls around the 3.0 mark (pure square wave), where the narrowing of the square's Pulse Width kicks in. I may also add routing capabilities of the LFO to other parts of the synth. We'll see.

First up, before i upload the updated version of the Beezlebaum: Creating a whole bunch of snapshots.

Greets,

Bolle