Re: Vortex Applications Notes

[The Man Himself <altruist@shoko.CALARTS.EDU>]

On 2 Dec 1996, Michael Peters wrote:

> I still have problems with the Vortex - the few really interesting and
> useful sounds I got out of it I found by blind trial and error, which is 
>a
> very tiresome method because most of the time the sounds aren't very
> interesting (they sound to me like just another chorus/echo combination).

That's funny -- practically all of my user registers are filled with some 
of the most bizarre, brain-bending, stomach-turning things I've ever heard.

> I still don't *understand* how it works. (This is largely due to lack 
>time
> plus my laziness which keep me from wading through the algorithm
> descriptions.)

I don't *understand* it that much either, to tell you the truth.  There 
are a couple of very bizarre patches that seem to have minds of their 
own, and behave in unpredictable ways.  My approach is usually along the 
lines of, "HMMM, let's see what this thing does if I turn X control to Y 
settings..." and then behold the onslaught.

The big problem (and the great thing about the box, as well) is that since
every single effect responds differently to the same general family of
settings, memorizing what a certain control setting does is only good for
that particular patch.  So turning up depth 2 has a very different result
on the escalator-over-the-seesaw pitch-shift thingie than it does on the
robot-gargling-salt-water jobbie. 

I'm reluctant to post too many patches, partially because of time and
partically because they're so wierd that I'm hesitant to give them away. 
Besides, there's no great secret; all you have to do is sit down with each
effect and tweek parameters 'till the cows come home.  You might be 
surprised -- I still can't believe this is the same box I demoed at 
Guitar Center.

--Andre