Negative envelopes , should invert the input signal .
Upward saw becomes downward saw …
Same for the comb filter …at the moment it only has a positive feedback gain …but when multiplied with an operator that has a negative value , the feedback gain should be
inverted .
This is currently not the case .
Multiply -Negative envelopes/operators in mod section should invert the input signal
That’s precisely what they already do, but it’s important to keep in mind the behaviour of the particular modulation you’re working with.
The Volume and Pitch modulations are uni-polar, so they have a valid range of 0.0 to 1.0. If you apply an operand to multiply that by -1.0, then you get a value from 0.0 to -1.0, which is obviously outside the valid range.
The end result is that the modulation preview appears to be totally empty/flat, and you probably won’t hear anything useful. However, the internal signal is still actually functioning correctly, and you simply have to shift it back into the valid range. To do this, apply another operand which adds +1.0 to the inverted signal.
Before: (Note that the additional operands are disabled here)
5715 
The Comb filter is a slightly different matter, since the filter modulations are currently always working with a range of 0.0 to 1.0 for their parameters. Can you absolutely not live without negative feedback there, or what?
That’s precisely what they already do, but it’s important to keep in mind the behaviour of the particular modulation you’re working with.
The Volume and Pitch modulations are uni-polar, so they have a valid range of 0.0 to 1.0. If you apply an operand to multiply that by -1.0, then you get a value from 0.0 to -1.0, which is obviously outside the valid range.
The end result is that the modulation preview appears to be totally empty/flat, and you probably won’t hear anything useful. However, the internal signal is still actually functioning correctly, and you simply have to shift it back into the valid range. To do this, apply another operand which adds +1.0 to the inverted signal.
Before: (Note that the additional operands are disabled here)
renoise-modulation-invert-before.png
After:
Inverting the Panning modulation requires one less operand, since it’s already bi-polar in nature, with a valid range from -1.0 to 1.0:
The Comb filter is a slightly different matter, since the filter modulations are currently always working with a range of 0.0 to 1.0 for their parameters. Can you absolutely not live without negative feedback there, or what?
dblue …thanks …I am aware of that …Renoise 3.0 is already 2 years old …so I know my way around the modifiers .
Simple dsp shit …multiplying audio with a negative value gives us the inverted signal …upsaw becomes downsaw etc…
A bit harsh here .
Sure I can live with negative feedback …but you know that +/- feedback amount gives different results ( for the comb etc) .
Same with the phaser dsp …it only has + feedback …now ( in redux and future renoise ) it has - and + feedback ( maybe my nagging had some impact ) .
The more options the better ,
I am aware of that …Renoise 3.0 is already 2 years old …so I know my way around the modifiers
Fair enough.
Then I guess you should know by now that the volume modulation is operating on the amplitude of the voice sent through the player engine, not processing its raw sample data at a low enough level to do tricks like inverting its phase.
As I said before, the volume modulation has a valid range of 0.0 (silence) to 1.0 (full gain @ 0dB). The final result of the volume modulation chain is a normalised multiplier from 0.0 to 1.0. In that context, negative values make no sense — How can something have negative amplitude?
Negative values will therefore be clipped to silence, since they fall outside the valid amplitude range.
If you want to (and you can!) process your volume modulation chain so that the values are inverted (or juggled around in any other way), then you must simply ensure that the final value falls into that valid range of 0.0 to 1.0, by shifting it up, down, or whatever else. I’ve already explained how to do this.
Simple dsp shit
“Simple DSP shit” or not, the volume modulation is not processing the raw sample data in the way that you imagine.
For now, if you want a phase inverted audio signal, then you should use a phase inverted sample (or apply a Gainer DSP with the phase inverted).
“Simple DSP shit” or not, the volume modulation is not processing the raw sample data in the way that you imagine.
For now, if you want a phase inverted audio signal, then you should use a phase inverted sample (or apply a Gainer DSP with the phase inverted).
And that’s why this subforum is called ‘ideas and suggestions’ 
.
It seems you are asking for what amounts to being able to ring modulate the audio signal by a control signal. Indeed, the ring mod dsp will produce what you are expecting. But, you may have to use the audio signal as the ‘control’ (turn off 'note-to-pitch) and the built in osc as the audio source, since the sample frequencies can go lower, play non-looped, and are generally more flexible (of course).