Yes, exactly!

can you describe exactly how you "rotate" phases?

Yes the Melda stuff is top tier!

Or reaktor , allpass filter in series et voila I always laugh at people who fall into the trap of acquiring plugins like disperser , all it takes is litlle bit off effort to understand dsp n general and roll your own stuff in either reaktor , supercolldier etc..

Wow thanks for that. I’ve been looking for something like this for awhile. I got some similar artifacting just dropping an eq3 on my tracks due to how it separates the bands

Thanks for the tip Boogs! Also check out "Le Phonk" it's a free plugin with a disperser in it.

@@WARDISWARD that's why DAWs and plugins exist, to facilitate and make more automatic stuff you can do manually. Otherwise, we would be coding text to make beats(which is also a thing some people do).

Yep. Similar to how a car or police siren raises in pitch as it approaches you and lowers as it passes you. If the car stops next to you, it will stop changing pitch. It's pretty much the same effect.

That's not to say it's doing nothing to the signal when the knob is static though. It's still shifting the phase of the signal around the cutoff point slightly, which essentially offsets everything above and below the cutoff point in time ever so slightly, which is what gives that weird squelchy vibe to the sound.

No problem!

Its 'Minimeters' by a guy called direct. It's pretty amazing and quite cheap. It also comes with an oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, stereo correlation analyzer and a loudness meter. 100% recommend

It's a free max4live one just called 'spectrogram'. It's the first one that comes up when you Google search for max4live spectrogram. It's the one by patrick320 I think.

¡De nada!

🤣

Nah, its different to a de-esser, although it can definately tame harsh frequencies if dialed in directly since it smears out the phases of the harmonics around the cutoff point. A de-esser actively attenuates the target frequecnies once they get too loud which is different.

Hey no worries! If I understand it correctly, from my testing, Free-form phase shifts the phase in a similar way and you can get similar results with it. The main difference is that Free-form phase introduces latency as opposed to disperser which doesn't. It seems to work in the same sorta way that a linear phase eq or filter would. The main difference in terms of the actual sound is that Free-form phase tends to smear out the sound a bit more, especially with transient heavy signals and extreme settings because its transfering a portion of the signals energy to before the signal has even started (which its able to do because of the latency.) Basically, if Free-form phase didn't introduce latency and worked in the same way as a minimum phase filter, im guessing it would probably sound identical, assuming you could set the values exactly the same.

I tend to use free form phase if I'm after more extreme results, since it can offset the phase way more than disperser can thanks to its depth knob

check out the borrosca video of recreating disperser, great video will probably answer your question

@@fkeyzuwu Haha you are SO SPOT ON with that comment. I saw it 3 weeks ago and it nailed it completely.

For me, it's mainly a sound design tool. It tends to make harmonically rich bass sounds more squelchy, and percussive sounds kinda watery and smooth.

Yeah, that's the hyper simple 3 word explanation haha. And it's not wrong, but you would get a bit of a different sound if you were to just put a normal delay on the bass portion of a signal. Since disperser smoothly transitions the phase offset of the bass content depending on where you put the frequency value. It's also not limited to just the bass frequencies, since you can move around both the frequency and pinch values too.

If want to really hear what it's doing, use it on a simple dry saw wave, the effect becomes pretty obvious

@@Naircol Now that I have an idea what it is doing I can hear it a lot better. Today I tried it out and it ended up sounding pretty cool on a wubby dubstep patch I made so I kept it on. >:D

@@Atezian nice!!

The difference with phasers as far as I know, is that they're applying the all-pass filters to a copied signal which is then played back against the original dry signal. This causes phase interference/volume attenuation at certain frequencies. So yeah, you could get a similar effect by stacking a bunch of phasers but you'll also get a whole lot of boosting and cutting, which is something disperser doesn't do. A cool experiment you could try, to maybe understand the difference a bit better, would be making your own phaser effect with disperser by duplicating a track with some kind of signal on it (saw waves are always good for this kinda experimentation). While playing them both back simultaneously, start adding a few dispersers on to one of the tracks. This should, in theory, give an effect similar to how phasers work.