This is a quick video demo on how to add some very shape-able and customizable distortion to any input signal using the new sample scanner unit. Hope this sparks some fun ideas!
Really fascinating stuff. I’m excited to dive into this and try it with fuller sounding samples. Would I be wrong in assuming this kind of how Audio Damage Shapes works?
Honestly I know nothing about that module. It is similar to how the Intellijel Shapeshifter works when you set the Mod A input up to scan the current wave table rather than having it use it’s internal ramp wave to scan it.
Finally got around to watching this one. Awesome
You can tell when you are manually manipulating the input gain that if there was an envelope doing that for you instead you would get some interesting textures that depended on the envelope stage. Same for having an envelope control certain aspects of the EQ3 or any filter.
i’m interested in using the module for wave-shaping distortion… the digital distortion hear sounded pretty nice, but it was unclear how it was working – could use a scope with this video.
i am now going to record some piston honda samples… thanks
i wouldn’t go as far as saying i understood the sample scanner, i learn in fits and starts… but yeah i liked playing with a piston honda sample i chopped up in audacity. i think i may have brought out its signature morphing sound? not sure… i am modulating the phase, with the same wave as is running the sample scanner, modulated by an lfo and random
i then clipped it to hell, which sounded fairly nice actually
That’s a really interesting complex tone you got there!
As far as understanding what you’re doing with the Sample Scanner, I would recommend watching this video made by Seth Shafer starting at 8:45. It’s about the Intellijel Cylonix Shapeshifter. He explains what what is now called the “shaper” function in the Shapeshifter.
When you have the Sample Scanner unit in the ER-301 set up the way we have it here, you’re doing the same thing. He does a really nice job of explaining it complete with graphs and a scope but without getting super mathy.
thanks Joe, thought I got it from the documents pretty easy, but it didn’t seem to be doing what i would expect on the screen…
Hey Joe, first post here, I’ve been watching your videos before taking the big leap and getting the er-301, very helpful and informative, and they show the huge potential of this module!
I’ve been looking for distortion ways in the er-301, and your video and post came up; watching your video I kinda got the practice, but not the theory behind it; now that I’m watching the Shapeshifter tutorial you posted it seems to me that the sample scanner is doing to our wave something similar to the phase distortion in the old casio CZ series, something like “reading” the sine wave at different speed depending on the sample scanned? with the amount controlled by the input level and the phase that changes the actual shape of the sample – that changes the speed of the reading of our sine wave, thus our harmonic content.
Am I right or is it an approximation? (I’d like to be right just to imagine the possibilities in this domain!)
Hey, welcome, @carlosbigne! I don’t really know enough about the CZ series to say if it’s doing the same thing or not - it might be? I think what you’re saying sounds accurate.
My mental map for it is more like a lookup table. The Y value of your input waveform determines what value will be looked up (X axis in the sample scanner waveform). And the Y value of the sampled waveform at that point X is what is output.
So if you have feed a linear ascending ramp into the sample scanner at unity gain, you should get whatever sample is loaded in the sample scanner back out. If you load a linear ascending ramp into the sample scanner, you should get whatever wave form you’re feeding in back out.
I think we’re maybe saying the same thing here a little differently.
One thing I don’t think I showed the video is that you can also modulate the phase of the sample scanner’s waveform while you’re scanning it with an input signal. Wild, huh?
I think we are saying the same thing but I’m looking at it the other way around (in my idea, wrongly, it was the sample that said “read this value” to the sine osc); I guess I’ll make my tests whenever I’ll get my hands on a 301, here I’m just speculating!