Maybe do the 24dB math in CytomicSVF one day

[Andreya-Autumn]

Sometimes it works but oftentimes if you switch while a voice is running it goes bork and never recovers.

It's fake anyway, I'm just chaining two instances and eyeballed the resonance factor. But I'm beginning to think that was not a good idea in the first place... Few possible fixes:

• I've probably just made some stupid mistake. Fix that so the current idea works.
• Remove the switch entirely.
• Try to do the proper math for a 24 dB/oct slope.

The last option is the best but scares me. May take a swing at it sometime anyway based on the paper and some other comments Andy's made here and there. But it is a bit out my depth.

[baconpaul]

I think having the fast SVF be 12db and having a sub section of the rest of the surge filters with the new API is fine myself. I never really was totally sure that the two-is-12-and-we-wing-it approach was best either.

Especially with the filters++ api we have plenty of other 24db filters to choose from right?

[Andreya-Autumn]

Yup agree. When I remove it I will leave this open but un-milestoned in case someone wants to work out the 4-pole svf maths one day. But we do not really need it today indeed.

[mkruselj]

I agree that just stacking two SVFs and sticking a resonance factor is not good enough. That factor probably needs adjustments across the cutoff sweep and might also need to be different per passband type...

[baconpaul]

Yeah the right thing to do is solve the same equation style set for the actual topology and that’s indeed math