In case you missed it:
http://libremusicproduction.com/news/20151210-infamous-plugins-v020-pre-announcement
Video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-jbAm7YU5c
_ssj71
Hopefully this will be an lv2 that will work in windows version too 
looks like something i’d really like to use
@ssj71 ADT is a very specific effect. You’ve got an interesting plug-in there, and I’m not quite sure what you should call the effect, but it isn’t ADT in the conventionally recognised sense. Its more like some kind of odd harmonizer / pitch shifter. That’s not to say it isn’t a potentially interesting or useful plug-in, but its not Artificial Double Tracking as its normally understood.
I never bothered to learn what the original machine at Abbey Road actually did. I’ve certainly heard it spoken about by my Beatles maniac friends, and even after being subjected to countless hours of Beatles tunes BY said friends, it was never quite clear to me when and where the effect was used, so I never said to myself MAN I GOTTA GET ME ONE OF THOSE… ie it never stood out as something obviously and clearly awesome. When I track vocals if I want doubled vocals I do something really radical. I armed another track and have the singer sing it again. Now this kind of makes me want to learn how the original device worked. I would imagine with tape.
That said I don’t see why you can’t call this plugin a kind of ADT.
mike:
You’re right in the sense that this isn’t an emulation of the iconic two-headed tape machine with an lfo, but the intent of this plugin really is vocal doubling. I did allow it to go to very extreme values, making it potentially useful for other things, but I simply tried to extend the principle that the original used: it plays back multiple copies of the track with slight variations between them. Mine has the difference (I consider an advantage) that you can separately control the pitch variation and the delay.
If you can come up with a more appropriate name, I don’t mind changing my wording. For now I can’t think of a better description of the effect’s primary use case than artificial double tracking.
@soundmachine: I haven’t tested my plugins on any other platform. I’m not sure of the portability of the GUI toolkit I used either :\ The DSP should be portable without too much trouble at least. I’ll have to look into it.
I think I’ll change it to simulated double tracking so as not to cause any confusion. Too late for this thread title though.
I think you can easily argue that anything that ISN’T actually getting the guy in the booth to cut another track, and actually physically doubling the track, that actually doubles the track, could be called Artifical Double Tracking.
While yes we could argue technicalities of the language back and forth for a while, I am leaving that topic alone and instead just going to say that if you decide you want to change the name, send me an email and I will change the title of the thread. My email is through gmail, and is seablaede Do note the extra ‘e’ in the name. Thanks.
Seablade
its semantics. Not a big deal to me. we’ll leave the title, but I’ll update the readme and website.