PitchFactor: Fine tuning of delay times in V3b not happening?

Home › Forums › Products › Stompboxes › PitchFactor: Fine tuning of delay times in V3b not happening?

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 4 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • January 16, 2011 at 10:35 am #107568
      Burger666
      Participant

      Is it just me or are others having this issue as well? I can't fine tune delay times with the encoder as per the original instructions. I'm guessing (and hoping) it's a bug in the V3 beta.

      Anyone else?

      Thanks.

      Brett K.

    • January 16, 2011 at 5:31 pm #121418
      rabiddiabetic13
      Member

      Just checked and yes I have the same problem on my PF.

    • January 22, 2011 at 2:22 pm #121456
      brock
      Participant

      I wanted to verify having the same V3 beta results here (in case this thread ends up 'lost in Space').  It appears that the 2 second 'timeout' is still active; but the delay time doesn't react to encoder movement.  After the two second period has passed, the encoder changes the PF algorithm (as it always has).

    • January 23, 2011 at 11:38 pm #121464
      Davide Schachter
      Member

      Hi Brett

      You were trying to use the fibonacci numbers, weren't you? I tried the same and it doesn't take 377 and also 610 it just gets close to. I can't actually tell if this was a problem before the update because I was using the tap tempo only. I noticed that if I use the tap tempo it does give me some numbers that i wouldn't get if I were manually dialing them in.

      David

    • January 24, 2011 at 4:12 am #121465
      Burger666
      Participant

      Davide Schachter:

      Hi Brett

      You were trying to use the fibonacci numbers, weren't you? I tried the same and it doesn't take 377 and also 610 it just gets close to. I can't actually tell if this was a problem before the update because I was using the tap tempo only. I noticed that if I use the tap tempo it does give me some numbers that i wouldn't get if I were manually dialing them in.

      David

      Spot on, David. It must be a bug and I have no doubt that our algorithmic benefactors are working on a fix right now. 🙂

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 4 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.