Granular/Vector Synthesis and the XW-P1

[Jokeyman123]

I have been revisiting a synthesis concept that has been around a long time, called "granular" synthesis which now still seems pertinent as I've noticed many virtual synths now incorporate this "granular" concept as part of their virtual synth engines. I am working on developing enough editing skills to try to duplicate this type of synthesis and/or the concept of "morphng" sounds with my Alesis Fusions-which can do this with its massive modulation routing possibilities, that's another user group!

 

But I am wondering if this might be possible-without doing any exploring yet-to do this with the XW-P1, since it can utilize 6 layers of tones and can be 'cross-modulated" with clever programming as described by AlenK but I would be interested to see if these layers can somehow create this morphing or granular effect-which results (depending on how its done) in a type of gradual or not so graual blending or shifting of tones over time-as one 'sound", "tone" or "program" depending upon whatever you wish to call the results.

 

What I am describing has been already inmplemented in the Korg Wavestation, my oldYamaha TG33 and SY35, which the latter  2 employing an X-Y joystick to gradually bring 4 different tones in or out, or subtly blend these 4 tones together. Athough this was achieved manually, sound editing enabled this blending/morphing/granular synthesis to be pre-programmed to change over time-can make for some very nice "evolving" textures. The Ensoniq TS series also could create this type of morphing effect-by using  wavetables programmed to gradually shift individual tones from one to another and at varying speeds depending upon how the programmer entered values for the tables, a similar result as the Wavestation, and Yamahas but utilized in a (somewhat) different way.  I know this can also be done with varying envelopes and individual tones-the PX560 has some excellent examples of these evolving textures with hex layer sounds-but if there were some way to "evolve' through 6 layers with the XW-P1, might produce some interesting results. perhaps the soilo synth progrmming might hold the key here too, I have not explored that possibility yet-possibly through setting up a variety of hex layer tones and recording the slide pot movements with the phrase sequencer- to bring individual tones in and out-sort of a "pseudo" morphing or granular sound, the 2 are not quite the same concepts but tend to produce similar results, at least from what I have heard.

Edited September 14, 2021 by Jokeyman123

[Mike Martin]

I don't think this would qualify as "Granular" but rather "Vector" Synthesis. 

 

Let me wrap my head around this - it may be possible.

[Jokeyman123]

There it is-with all the synthesis terminology-vector synthesis is definitely more accurate to how I am thinking. I've just been studying a few granular synthesis software programs-not quite what I am after. I think it is possible on the XW-maybe even with the 560-but I would need more time to experiment with editing parameters. I am sure there is a way to perform a type of vector synthesis-as I posted, some of the 560 hex layers already sound very similar with the types of evolving textures I've experimented with. This might open another approach to yet another way to synthesize sounds that have yet to be explored with this already pretty amazing family of Casios.  I can imagine a type of 'time variant" element addressing completely different tones might bring up some very interesting combinations. I can only physically move slide controls so fast, but with possibly LFO's or other envelopes controlled by yet other LFO's-now we have a form of 'vector" synthesis that can morph through sounds at rates not possible with physical slider movements. Repeating myself here, AlenK has documented some of these possibilities, which in turn has generated my interest in this possibly new element of sound design for our Casios. Thanks Mike, I'll keep my eyes peeled for anything you come up with and will post any examples I might conjure up.

[AlenK]

Re vector synthesis, the XW synths lack a joystick. But if using the pitch wheel and the mod wheel in combination is close enough (pitch wheel to crossfade between two waveforms and the mod wheel to crossfade between two others), the solo synth's virtual controllers should make this possible. Mono only, of course. 

 

Re granular synthesis, the idea is to switch between different sounds in succession so rapidly that the ear doesn't hear them as different sounds but instead as a composite sound. Can that be done on the XW? If so, the solo synth is again likely the only way. But I can only think of a way to switch rapidly enough between two waveforms rather than a succession of them, which might well sound different than simply summing them but might not in the end be very interesting to hear.

 

Re other synthesis methods, emulating PPG-style wave sequencing might be more promising. I think I posted some ideas about how that couldbe done a few years ago and I think it was in reply to another thread by Jokeyman!

[Jokeyman123]

Thanks AlenK,I was hoping you'd see this post. I'll try to find these earlier posts. Interesting to see what Mike might come up with too. For me, a big part of the fun with keyboards is experimenting with sound design-and the XW, despite a few minor limitations, is a terrific machine to do that. And despite the advances in virtual software machines, it just is not the same-and after all, the XW software is not exactly shabby. To compare-my Fusions, as advanced as these were-and still are-do not have sysex implementation-the engineers sadly omitted this important part of the OS design, and eliiminated the possibility of creating editors, although some clever programmers at least have been able to develop partial sound librarians and a sample converter program-it is a sampler as well as an FM, physical modelling and virtual analog machine which is doubly frustrating as its tone/multi/sample contents can be directly accessed through USB-most of which are on the internal hard drive-this got me to revisit the XW as possibly capable of other ways of designing sounds, as did your documents. Hope all is well. 

[Jokeyman123]

Adding to this-I found your (AlenK)  post about using layers and velocity cross-fading-but still trying to see if there is a way to use the mod wheel, or just programmed envelopes for each tone to create a type of morphing or wave sequencing effect. I need to study over your docs again regarding programming tones in the XW. I'm sure it can be done, ut maybe not with the mod wheel. I am studying some of the hex layer tones in the PX560-to see how the more 'evolving' sounds were done-but again, these were programmed using envelopes-not the mod wheel. Might not be able to do it with the mod wheel. I don't think there are any modulation "routings" that can fade a layer in a hex layer or solo synth tone (the other possibility I am trying since several oscillators can be used in a solo synth tone) in or out. 

[AlenK]

I can think of a way to fade between three waveforms in the solo synth using the pitch-bend wheel. Bottom position would yield waveform A, center would give waveform B and top position would produce waveform C. Five virtual controllers would be required, two of them to cancel out the pitch bend itself. 

 

Re smoothly crossfading between a sequence of waveforms in time, ala Korg Wavestation, I think it is just barely possible using the solo synth and the step sequencer. Two of the sequencer control tracks would be used to control two knobs programmed to select waveforms (there is an NRPN for that) in two of the four oscillators while a tempo-synced LFO set to a triangle wave (and possibly a virtual controller) implements crossfading between them. I think only 15 waveform changes would be possible over the course of the sequence. They would be equally spaced but adding a control track to modify tempo could allow unequal spacing. They would also repeat unless another control track and knob implemented sequencer start/stop. We have run out of control tracks but if there were another we could implement a volume envelope over the whole sequence. Per-note triggering would use a null arpeggio. (And, I should note, would only work in the bottom octave of the keyboard because that is where sequences can be transposed. To be able to play on any key would require transforming the sequence to a phrase, which is possible but a lot of work.)

 

These are just ideas. I have not tried them. But they are consistent with what I know about the solo synth. And there is already a sound file on SoundCloud from someone that demonstrates sequencing between solo synth waveforms (without crossfading). I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

PS. Found it. By Hypnotuba: https://soundcloud.com/hypnotuba/casio-xw-p1-solo-synth

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by AlenK

[Jokeyman123]

That's the idea-very good. The tone changes in his example are abrupt-but this is what i am after-i think just using different types of tones with less pronounced attacks-keeping the body of the tone while softening the attack transient would blend the sounds, but this is definitely how i was thinking. so it is possible...I am not too adept with NRPN functions with the Xw-I will have to bone up on this,  think one of your docs AlenK has some very good pointers re NRPN and the control change channels in the step sequencer. Nice! we are onto something rather novel here I think.  Wish I had a little more time to experiment with this-am up to my neck in some family challenges but this music work keeps me from going over the edge!

[AlenK]

Yes, I think suitably adjusting the attack and release (or decay) times might be all you need to blend the waveforms in the sequence at a given tempo. It is somewhat unfortunate that the NRPN-induced change in waveform only happens on new notes because it greatly complicates other aspects of this. But it is what it is and if you did not need new notes, you could not use the attack/decay in that way. 

[AlenK]

Another possibility is to do what Mike Martin is doing here on the PX-5S:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=bK1UbpXXmoE

 

He explains in the description that he is triggering different layers in a Hex Layer tone by using different velocity values coming out of the arpeggiator. That gives six tones that he is switching between. Of course, the same thing can be done on the XW-P1.

 

BTW, there is a very old term for the sound you get from this: hocketing. It goes back to medieval times and IMO it has always sounded cool. 

[Jokeyman123]

Hocketing-yes-I had to study early medieval music as well as later rennaisance worksI originally came across the idea listening to Steve Reich-since i was primarily a percussionist/drummer in the 60's/70's before studying other instruments and choral works-the idea of subtly changing timbres with rhythmic "phase shifting" by  varying and shifting repetitive rhythms with various percussion instruments intrigued me-how one rhythm would subtly "morph" into a different one by overlapping and rhythmically shifting the same multi-rhythms over time. I still have my original vinyl recording of Steve's first works.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drumming_(Reich)

 

Similar concept executed differently, and fascinated me-it sounded a little like polyphonic rhythms by African drummers-such as Olatunji's ensembles where different repetitive beats would blend together by virtue of being different. Ginger Baker managed a bit of this with multi-rhythmic drumming-overlapping 2's against 3's (triplets against quadruplets to create a type of "wall" of sound coming from the drums.

 

years back, we did some of this in the NJ Percussion Ensemble depending upon the composition. Charles Wurorinen's compositions used this compositional structure, as he used Indonesian, gamelan and other eastern and middle-eastern music sources to compose rhythms of 5s, 7's and 9's over more traditional triplet and quadruple rhythm groups, which when overlapped and brought in and out by the individual performer, would create a different sound not quite like the individual instruments playing the parts. Using the phrase sequencer for overdubbing seems closer to being able to do this. The XW-or the 560 are worth exploring IMO-since between "performance layers"-which I've been looking at again since i reviewed your doc about cross-fading-and hex layers, I'll have to work on this some more. The XW is definitely not obsolete-au contraire-as I've always thought-the more I study it, the more unique ways i discover it can create something new. Then again-my "new" Alesis Fusions-with its insane combinations of modulation routings-and FM no less that can be added to a multi-layer tone or modulated to other synthesis models in this-had me revisiting the XW-there is a symbiosis to all this I think. Especially since that is another so-called "obsolete" music making machine. 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Jokeyman123

[AlenK]

I REALLY get the allure of synths, classic and "obsolete" models in particular. They are fascinating and there have been so many of them. But I am resisting their siren call.

 

If you don't count the 80's vintage toy Casio sampler in my closet, I have only three keyboards: the XW-P1, a PX-560 and a Roland D-10 I probably bought in 1989. These are not the creme de la creme of keyboards although one could argue that the PX-560 is higher end then the other two. But they are all underrated, IMO. 

 

Combined, these three keyboards provide around 62 channels of sound (parts) and over 280 voices of polyphony. All three combine PCM with digital subtractive synthesis, so not much variety in synthesis methods (i.e., no FM, no PD, no direct wave sequencing, etc.). Nevertheless, they do all sound different and to an extent complement one another. 

 

Long story short, if I can't make interesting music with what I have, buying more isn't going to help. And I am still geeking over what the XW-P1 alone can accomplish. For instance, I think I have a method of synchronizing the phase of a solo-synth LFO with the start of a note. Normally, the LFOs are either asynchronous or MIDI-beat synchronized. With that and the wave sequencing stuff we've been talking about here, I guess there will need to be a Version 6 of the XW-P1 companion at some point. 

[Jokeyman123]

A-ha! no pressure...I don't have your documentation skills-or I'm too lazy to-you've done much more in depth study and are you ever right-less is more. I am convinced-the more equipment I have, the less focused I am to create-anything. It's a real problem. Why I keep coming back to the XW-and the 560-the musical tools are so advanced, I often am stumped as to what to work with first thus my maybe not so joking description of what might come out if I actually had all this equipment creating streams of music at once, I've done some of that just to see what it sounds like-it can be utter madness musically speaking.

 

Part of the fun is taken out due to the automation now possible-bu it is also so alluring. It used to take major effort to create something musical and worthwhile-it still does, but you are so right-62 channels of parts-seemingly endless choices for sounds. I have to look through 8 printed pages of sounds just to pick a handful for a composition with just the old Equinox! The Fusion is worse-this instrument is  literally an archive of sample libraries-and it is mind-blowing what this thing can do.  Look up the Novachord-another genius programmer named Stephen Howell, now passed away-got hold of the owners of a restored Novachord-and created an entire sample library of this amazing instrument, and many others. I won't live long enough to create even a few compositions with these samples. He created Hollow Sun, just humbles me to see what some of these people accomplished and yourself, not idle flattery. I confess i am trying to get the Casios to do some of this sound creation and i will, or blow out its microprocessor trying! There are sounds in these Casios no-one has created yet. I spent months practicing my programming skills on the CZ's, many others-it can literally consume me if I'm not careful.

 

The XW and 560-sonic capabilities that seem infinite, sigh. I have to keep each monster in separate spaces-otherwise I literally am overwhelmed at what is possible. I guess that now becomes the challenge-to look for new "modalities"-ways to use these sounds-to condense the thought process to basic compostion, but then I can create-a multi-layer phrase-a multilayer hex layer (with 2 Casios) and combine these-then add a sequencer arrangement-2 sequencer arrangements. That's the tough part-with all the power inherent in the complex possibilities-to try to restrain myself to a few. Wuorinen used to emphasize-pay attention to the spaces in the notes and sounds when composing or performing, as important as the sounds and he was using some pretty unusual instruments way back-and then there was...Harry Partch...I'm exhausted already. 

[Jokeyman123]

Granular synthesis-finally sussed this out-it is different from "vector" in that-you are phasing different 'tones"/sounds or whatever you wish to call them in and out-wih vector the shifts are gradual or not so gradual but can be heard distinctly. with "granular" (I think if I understand it correctly-ben playing with a few software granular synths-I am also shifting different tones in and out-but I am doing it simultaneously-to create one 'tone" or sound which will-by virtue of the fact that is is shifting different tones but too quickly to be apparent as such, it is creating what seems like a distinctly different tone-not quite the same as layering. The theory being that phasing in and out through several tones (almost) simultaneously will create random changes in the tone's timbre-although it will stil sound like one "tone". I bet this effect to can be simulated with the XW-possibly with the sequencer shifting very rapidly through several different tones-not quite vector-but wow, imagine being able to create vector, granular and all the other synth techniques with this instrument-the more I study it, the more interesting it becomes-and thanks again AlenK for keeping this beast alive. 

[AlenK]

I don’t think the sequencer will be able to switch between waveforms fast enough to implement granular synthesis. But the two LFOs of the solo synth plus some virtual controllers could possibly provide four suitable waveforms that could do the switching between the solo synth’s four internal oscillators fast enough. But will such switching sound any different than simply summing the oscillators? I don’t know. Frankly, I think trying to implement vector synthesis and wave sequencing are more promising directions for investigation. I wish I had more time right now to do that. 

[Jokeyman123]

I will try to get some time to work on it-I no longer have any synths capble of true vector synthesis-but I have been simulating the effect with my Equinox-which is capable of layering 16 distinct tones-all accessible live with 8 drawbars-which changes can be recorded-in a sense simulating vector synthesis by fading tones in and out-but not as a single multi or progam that can be saved-only as a distinct sequenced recording. I'm experimenting to see if the effect is worth working on with the XW-so far based upon what I am hearing with the Equinox-although I have only done this with the drwbars, i think it is worth experimenting with. Blending sounds which drift in and out over time-with the time variant being controllable-and as a distinct group of sounds that can sound independently of for example a few other sequenced tracks-i think can bring a new dimension to the XW-I will also try this with the PX560-I have done a bit of this experimenting with the hex layers-by varying the attack and decays of the amp envelopes in respective individual tones in the layer. I will post some examples if I have any success, i think I will. Your guides, AlenK will be a major help. and this is what makes the XW such an interesting machine-being able to revisit/duplicate older technologies/instruments/techniques with this amazingly powerful little Casio. 

[Jokeyman123]

I am trying to recall the first 'digital" keyboard that used vector synthesis-before the Wavestation and TG/SY Yamahas had it. I recall it was pretty expensive, i can't remember which it was-I think a Sequenctial Circuits....yep here it is the Prophet VS. Never had one but remember wishing I did! Another "obsolete" keyboard.....

 

http://www.vintagesynth.com/sci/pvs.php

[AlenK]

And some of the engineering team for the Prophet VS worked on the Korg Wavestation, which hence inherited vector synthesis and the joystick, and added wave sequencing. More recently, we have the Korg Wavestate. 

 

Since it sounds like you are open and available to experiment, here are a few ideas.

 

First, vector synthesis. Short of making your own MIDI connected joystick or buying a LAB4MUSIC ENJOY, which at $300US is pretty expensive, we have to use the mod wheel and pitch-bend wheel to crossfade between waveforms, at least if we want the ability to crossfade with one hand while we play notes with the other. (You can already use the sliders to change oscillator levels but that is not necessarily easy to control in real time, especially with only one hand.) 

 

That means monophonic operation with the solo synth. (Or does it? See some ideas about that below.) The first four oscillators (S1, S2, P1, P2) provide our four different sounds (they don't have to be just different waveforms because each includes a pitch envelope, a filter, a filter envelope and a volume envelope). Six of the virtual controllers crossfade sounds or waveforms: two with the mod wheel as the source, two with pitch-bend up as the source and two with pitch-bend down as the source. This actually only provides partial crossfading. To fully emulate the way the joystick works in the VS, Wavestation and Wavestate would require 12 virtual controllers. We only have eight. But partial crossfading should still sound pretty good.

 

Now, the VS (and maybe the others) allowed the action of the joystick to be automated by specifying a vector envelope. The XW-P1's Phrase Sequencer can record a particular motion sequence of the wheels and that should sound pretty close. Alternately, we can use the four control tracks of the step sequencer to perform automated crossfading. The step sequencer can be started when notes start using a null arpeggio as described in The XW-P1 Companion. 

 

Can vector synthesis be emulated on polyphonic voices? I have two ideas about that. First idea: We can arrange the same kind of crossfading control using the mod and pitch-bend wheels if we pass PCM tones in other zones through the solo synth. (PS. Maybe. It depends on a controller interaction I haven’t tested yet!) But that means crossfading between only three tones, not four (unless we add a noise component from the solo synth as a fourth tone, which need not be polyphonic). Second idea: In a Performance the knobs can be programmed to control the levels of four of the layers in a Hex Layer tone by way of NRPN's. The four control tracks of the step sequencer can be addressed to the knobs. Hence, automated crossfading. Of course, the ADSR envelopes do something similar but not with quite as much control. 

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by AlenK

[AlenK]

Second emulation topic: wave sequencing. This is where it gets fun. Monophonically, in a Performance we can program a knob to switch between waveforms for any one of the four internal solo-synth oscillators (see the "split UI number" NRPNs on page 29 of the MIDI Implementation document). The waveforms won't switch unless new notes are initiated at the same time, so this means actually entering notes on the Sol1 track with that track pointed to Part/Zone 1. Unless we want to emulate the sound of a "song in a note" as the Wavestation and Wavestate can do, all the notes should be the same pitch. 

 

That allows a very rhythmic wave sequence. What if we want a smooth crossfade between successive waveforms instead? On the Wavestation that takes two oscillators and such is the case here. The idea would be to program on one control track, waveform switching on odd numbered steps for the first oscillator. On another control track controlling the second oscillator, waveform switching occurs on even numbered steps. So this would allow up to 15 waveforms in sequence, albeit all switches happening at identical intervals. To get smooth crossfading between those waveforms, the envelope idea you mentioned earlier could be used. What I think will sound a little better is to use a beat-synchronized triangle wave from one of the LFOs. This would control the volumes of the two oscillators in opposite senses (when the volume of one goes up, the volume of the other goes down). With the right settings, this SHOULD perform fairly smooth crossfading between the waveforms. 

 

There are still two potential problems. Both problems are caused by the need to generate new notes in order to switch waveforms.

 

First problem: We can only play the wave sequence where we can initiate the sequencer. While we can start the wave sequence when initiating a note by using a null arpeggio over any contiguous region on the keyboard, we will always get the same pitch. Being able to play different pitchs will only be possible on the lowest octave of the keyboard with "Key Shift" activated. But what if one octave of pitches isn't good enough? One idea: Convert the sequence to SMF (either be recording the MIDI output with a DAW or by making the sequence a chain and saving the chain to an SD card as SMF), then converting the SMF to a phrase using the Casio XW-P1 data editor, observing the procedure about that described on page 107 in The XW-P1 Companion. Once all the sequencing is controlled by a phrase, it can be played on any key. Second (much easier!) idea: Instead of putting notes in the Sol1 track of the sequencer, initiate the notes using a custom arpeggio programmed to repeat the same note fifteen times. Use the sync option on the arpeggio in order to start the sequencer on the first note of the arpeggio (no need for a null arpeggio now). 

 

Second problem: Since new notes are being generated continuously, there is no volume envelope over the wave-sequenced notes we play. This is probably not even required for rhythmic wave sequences but will generally be a problem for crossfaded sequences. One possible solution is to use two more sequencer control tracks, one sending out values for a pseudo-envelope using a CC#11 message (expression), the other controlling a knob programmed for the NRPN of the Step Sequencer Start/Stop command (in this case "stop"), as described starting on page 53 of The XW-P1 Companion.

 

So far, only one oscillator, or two oscillators for crossfading, is used in our hypothetical wave-sequenced tone. Can we do more? For rhythmic wave sequences that don't require an overall volume envelope (because the sequence is composed of discretely heard notes) there is no reason all four oscillators can't be used at the same time. And there is no reason real-time user-controlled "vector" synthesis using the mod and pitch-bend wheels I described in the post above can't be also be used at the same time. That should be fun and pretty close to what the Korg Wavestate can do. (Although of course, the Wavestate can do so much more and do it all polyphonically!)

 

Can more than one crossfaded wave sequence be used in a tone?  Two of them could be used if we solve the problem of the overall volume envelope, which could now not be generated using control tracks because all four would be required for wave switching. 

 

What about polyphonic wave sequencing? As discussed before, Mike Martin already solved that one, at least for rhythmic sequences, by using a custom arpeggio with a Hex Layer tone. Different velocity levels trigger different layers for successive notes. You only get six different tones but it still sounds pretty good in the video linked to (albeit done on a PX-5s). I can't think of any other way to do it since the XW-P1 provides relatively little internal control over Hex Layer sounds. (Unlike the solo synth, NRPNs are missing for most of the parameters of a Hex Layer tone.) 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by AlenK

[Jokeyman123]

I've experimented today without the XW-with my Equinox instead by recording a simple (well maybe not so simple) sustained chord using 4 sequencer tracks for 16 measures-then manipulating the levels of each distinct tone with the drawbars manually-to audition what is possible and what could be done with the XW. Very difficult to maintain fairly constant dynamic levels as I shift tones in and out. The beauty of this-is that I can create a wave-sequencing effect-then still have an additional 12 tracks at least with the Equinox.This is a crude way of doing it-and of course is not allowing for any type of automatic wave or vector sequencing-but is giving me a refresher with what I can expect to hear-and provides interesting shifts of layers producing some unexpected results I find rather interesting-I also have had to choose tones with no pronounced attacks or articulations in order to manipulate the body/sustain portion of the tones I've experimented with or modified the attack envelopes of whatever tones I'm using. 

 

Very challenging to bring 4 different tones gradually in/out through manual drawbars-did not always give me smooth results but with practice, I was able to create some interesting morphing effects over time that I might not be able to achieve in any other way. Still not exactly what I'm after but pretty close.

 

I will study your tutorials and these recent posts, begin some experiments with the XW, hopefully tomorrow. I did not think this would be of much use musically, but after my little experiment with the Equinox and real-time fades in/out with drawbar control-the Equinox was exceptional as the drawbars were designed to be custom programmed to send a variety of control messages-I am pretty happy with the results-"playing" the drawbars in effect is creating a composition all by itself, in a very "new-agey' sounding sort of way. almost as if i am creating an alternate controller to shift sounds in and out rather than just using the keys to play. Definitely will explore this on the XW-I need to become more familiar with setting up NRPNs-something I have not explored much until now. There is definitely musical "fruit" here. In fact the XW feature sets brought  me here, to re-think in this direction, experimenting with the Equinox, and now possibly doing something similar also with the PX-560, but i will experiment first with the XW. 

[AlenK]

On 9/27/2021 at 9:20 PM, AlenK said:

Six of the virtual controllers crossfade sounds or waveforms: two with the mod wheel as the source, two with pitch-bend up as the source and two with pitch-bend down as the source. This actually only provides partial crossfading. To fully emulate the way the joystick works in the VS, Wavestation and Wavestate would require 12 virtual controllers. We only have eight. But partial crossfading should still sound pretty good.

 

Now, the VS (and maybe the others) allowed the action of the joystick to be automated by specifying a vector envelope. The XW-P1's Phrase Sequencer can record a particular motion sequence of the wheels and that should sound pretty close. Alternately, we can use the four control tracks of the step sequencer to perform automated crossfading. The step sequencer can be started when notes start using a null arpeggio as described in The XW-P1 Companion. 

I should amplify a little on these ideas. Six virtual controllers are required for the crossfading itself, but the remaining two are also required in order to cancel out the pitch bending of the pitch-bend wheel. 
 

For automated control of the crossfading using the step sequencer control tracks, I was initially thinking of programming the knobs to control the NRPNs of each of the four solo-synth oscillators. The problem is that the XW-P1’s little embedded processor probably won’t be able keep up if smoothing is turned on. Smoothing will be required for smooth crossfading.
 

A better, simpler solution may be to program two control tracks to output CC#1 (modulation) and pitch-bend data. The XW-P1 seems to be based on MIDI even internally, hence I expect that the data from those control tracks will be routed to the solo-synth engine and then be used as actually programmed in the tone rather than directly (e.g., sending pitch-bend data will not actually bend the pitch). But I could be wrong. What I am also not sure about is if smoothing can be turned on without problems for four simultaneous control tracks outputting CC data. The amount of data being generated is much less with CC than with NRPN. The XW-P1's processor can certainly keep up with that on one channel of smoothed data, but I cannot recall for sure whether or not I tried four simultaneous channels of smoothed data back when I was experimenting.

 

Edited September 29, 2021 by AlenK

[Jokeyman123]

I am working on this-still trying to decide which procedure to follow. I'm thinking first with hex layers-as described and demo'ed by Mike with the PX5S, although I'm not sure how he programmed an arpeggio to trigger different layers-I have to review the arpeggio programmable functions-different performance parts can be edited to respond to a specific velocity ranges and triggered at different velocities with a custom arpeggio designed for this. This seems the simpler approach as I work on the others.  i am also studying the 4-oscillator approach with a solo synth voice. This is more involved, but might be closer to an actual "vector" or 'wave sequencing" sound result depending upon how successful I am with it. I'm also thinking the phrase sequencer approach-dividing a performance into 4 distinct tones-overdubbing each part and using the knob controllers to bring each sound in or out, or the drawbar controls. I need to study your documents further about how that is done, i see the info is there,  now it's time to apply these techniques. Like Charlie Chan said in one of his movies (I've been watching on Youtube)-"Words don''t cook rice!" I'll stay posted. 

Edited September 29, 2021 by Jokeyman123