Advances in Modular Percussion Synthesis: Exploring Computational Methods and Connections
150 likes | 280 Views
This paper delves into the latest methodologies in modular percussion synthesis, focusing on the connectivity of predefined musical elements. It examines various computational methods such as Finite Difference scheming and the intricacies of sound generation in physical models. Key components like bars and plates are analyzed within different boundary conditions, emphasizing energy conservation and the role of connections in synthesis. Strategies for tackling nonlinear problems are explored, showcasing how these approaches can enhance sound quality, stability, and computational efficiency in modern acoustic environments.
Advances in Modular Percussion Synthesis: Exploring Computational Methods and Connections
E N D
Presentation Transcript
A Modular Percussion Synthesis Environment DAFX-09, Como, Sept., 2009. Stefan Bilbao Acoustics and Fluid Dynamics Group / Music University of Edinburgh • Modular synthesis • Percussion synthesis: Components and connections • FD schemes/computational issues and costs • Sound examples
Modular synthesis: strategies • Goal: arbitrary connections of predefined “canonical” musical objects • Many different methodologies: • Modal • Scattering, including waveguides, WDFs • Lumped networks • Direct time-domain methods (FD, FEM, spectral, etc.) • Many distinctions, in terms of • Computability (uniqueness/existence of solutions) • Range of applicable systems • Precomputational load • Memory requirements • Stability guarantees • Today: percussion…
Components: Bars Linear, thin, uniform bar: Basic parameter set: PDE model: Stiffness Freq.-ind loss Freq.-dep loss Scaling… Reduced equivalent parameter set: + boundary conditions: clamped, pivoting, free, etc. Can relax assumptions: non-uniform, thick, nonlinear…
Components: Plates Linear, thin, uniform rectangular plate: Basic parameter set: PDE model: Reduced equivalent parameter set: Scaling… + boundary conditions: clamped, pivoting, free, etc. Can relax assumptions: non-uniform, thick, nonlinear, geometry…
Connections • Distributed connections between objects (1 and 2, of bar or plate type): • Connection characterized by density distributions (in simplest case delta functions) • Connection described, in terms of PDEs, as • Spring/damper connection: • where • Connection is dissipative (passive). Linear spring nonlinear spring (cubic) damper Generalized relative displacement Forces equal and opposite
Excitations/Output • In general, for percussion, would like a mallet model… • Because collision times are very short, sufficient to use a fixed contact distribution, and forcing function or pulse. • Maximum of force pulse amplitude • Duration of pulse brightness • output: scales with velocity over an output distribution: • Note: output distribution can be time-varying…multiple outputs can be taken simultaneously.
Difference schemes: components • Consider a network of M unconnected elements, under zero-input conditions. • For the mth object, can develop an explicit difference scheme directly: Unknown (current) state Previously computed state where: • is state of mth object, defined over Nm points • are sparse matrices, of size Nm x Nm • A good idea to concatenate these schemes… where
Difference Schemes: Connections • Many possible discretizations… Unknown appears “linearly,” when previous state is known…guarantee of existence/uniqueness of solutions… Thus: Known at time step n+1 (previously computed) • To relate generalized relative displacements to state: • For a set of Q connections, in vector form:
Explicit nonlinear update form • When excitation/connections are present, update becomes… previously computed/supplied externally) • Using force/displacement relations: known known, positive definite (diagonal for non-overlapping connections) • Thus: a unique update, involving a low-order linear system solution… • A compact run-time loop, at least in Matlab! for n=1:Nf … read in current excitation data … eta1 = I*u1; eta2 = I*u2; eta1sq = rvec.*(eta1).^2; temp = (mvec+eta1sq).*(IB*u1+IC*u2)+(nvec+eta1sq).*eta2; A = II+(M-diag(eta1sq))*IJ; F = A\temp; u = B*u1+C*u2+S*D+J*F; out(:,n) = Q*u; u2 = u1; u1 = u; end
Numerical Energy Conservation Under lossless conditions, this network conserves energy to machine accuracy… • Energy function is positive definite (not quadratic!) under the usual CFL stability conditions: • Bars: • Plates: • No further stability concerns due to connections… • a nonlinear numerical stability guarantee… • and a useful debugging feature! Energy of Plates Energy of Bars Energy of Connections Total Energy
Basic configuration • A simple set of uncoupled bars… • Can vary • boundary conditions • loss • striking points • Sound is very artificial…characteristic of raw linear systems!
Conclusions and Perspectives Direct time/space domain methods: a flexible alternative to standard physical modeling methods… • Compared with scattering methods: • Handles multiple nonlinearities easily • No topology/delay-free loop issues • No global effects on network due to propagation of port-resistances…scheme is entirely local • Simpler stability/existence/uniqueness results • Compared with modal methods • A much better match to nonlinear problems…no linear system theory or frequency domain analysis concepts necessary • IO/connections do not require recalculation of modal coefficients if varied • Minimal precomputation (no eigenvalue problems to be solved) • Minimal storage (no modal shapes/sets of coefficients to be stored) • Multiple outputs generated at no extra cost!