Hi,
That's right, I think you're complicating things
I think you shouldn't need to tweak the cutoff frequency to get the results you want. Everytime a bounce passes the filter, the bounce will get filtered more.
I'll try to visualize it. A lowpass filter with a slope like the one below wouldn't give you the result you want, because the first time a bounce passes this filter all the signal frequencies above the cutoff frequency are lost and all the signal frequencies beneath the cutoff frequency are unaffected:
Passing a bounce again through this filter wouldn't change the sound anymore and you indeed would have to change the cutoff frequency over time to get the result you want, but with the unwanted side effect that all the bounces will get affected.
Fortunately, filter slopes look in practice more like this:
When a bounce passes this filter, not all the signal fequencies above the cutoff filter will be lost. If the above filter would be a 6dB/octave lowpass filter with a cutoff frequency of 1000Hz, the audible content of this bounce at 2000Hz will be dampened by 6dB, 12dB at 3000Hz, 18dB at 4000Hz, etc. If the bounce passes this filter the second time, the audible content of the bounce at 2000Hz will be dampened by another 6dB and at 3000Hz another 12dB, etc.
The result is that it sounds as if you would turn the cutoff frequency down over time per bounce.If you would use a hipass filter, the result would be the oposite. How steeper the filter slope (For example, a 12dB/octave filter instead of a 6dB/octave filter, how faster the sound will change.
To conclude this long story: Just start experimenting with different filter types and different cutoff frequencies. I'm sure you'll find the result you're looking for.
cheers,
vincent
edit: visualizing the filter slopes with asci characters wasn't a good idea, so I replaced them with ugly pictures
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: visilia on 2002-08-05 09:51 ]</font>