+1 indeed! On Nov 26, 2012 11:06 PM, "Chris Wilson" <cwilso@google.com> wrote: > > +1! > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Patrick Borgeat < patrick.borgeat@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Sounds awesome! >> >> >> 2012/11/26 Chris Rogers <crogers@google.com> >>> >>> Yeah, .phaseOffset is really what it needs to be I think. This would be additive with the cummulative phase from .frequency (and .detune). This seems nice since if you set .frequency to 0, then there would be no cummulative phase and you could control the phase directly with .phaseOffset. How does that sound? >> >> >
Received on Monday, 26 November 2012 21:38:33 UTC