good results with filter tracking over here too. i am using a analog keys.
1 Like
When using filter 1 as an oscillator, either by using the filter feedback or pinging it with noise, I have acceptable tracking for maybe 2 octaves max. It seems to be better in the high range (roughly above 600 Hz) regardless of the ābaseā cutoff setting.
Could I expect more range ? Iāve run a calibration twice, no difference.
I think it sounds ace, so would love to be able to play it
Common approach seems to be to set tracking to 32 or so for playability. I assume youāve done that?
1 Like
Yes.
Filter 2, with the same settings, can track the pitch on a much wider range.
2 Likes
Being relatively new to A4, Iād be curious if someone more experienced comes up with an idea hereā¦ 
Oh waitā¦. just read above! Thanks @avantronica
1 Like
OK, this confirms what I witnessed. Too badā¦ I think Filter 1 sounds much better.
2 Likes
The manual says Filter 2 has more consistent resonance behavior than Filter 2, and I took that to suggest the keytracking is more consistent as well (from Filters in Appendix A of the manual):
Compared to Filter 1, Filter 2 has a more
uniform resonance behavior over the whole audio
spectrum.
2 Likes
Just played around a bit with Filter 2. Tracking is excellent 
Will compare the same patch today with Filter 1.
1 Like
Ok. Some (by now probably well known) observations about Filter 1:
- Tracking capability is rather limited as stated above.
- You can still get good results by fine-tuning trigs individually.
- It generates a good amount of white-ish noise with higher resonance settings. I love that lo-fi vibe a lot but it might not suit your genre.
If you ever wondered, why thereās a drop in volume in lower registers when pinging the filter: Lower notes/frequencies require a longer trigger than higher notes as a general rule.
2 Likes
Maybe, butā¦even the day after ?
Good question. After all itās digitally controlled. Havenāt checked, though.
1 Like
Except warmth I guessā¦
1 Like