I believe z~ is just rzero~ 0. cheers Miller
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote: > Hallo, > Matt Barber hat gesagt: // Matt Barber wrote: > > > Actually, for those of us who insist on vanilla and do everything with > > expr/expr~/fexpr~ or abstractions, is it possible to implement [z~] in > > fexpr~ for a delay larger than its vector size? You could do it with > > an abstraction using [delwrite~] and [delread~], setting the [block~] > > to 1, and then set the delay as a ratio to the [samplerate~] -- the > > difficulty in making it work correctly here is setting the size of the > > [delwrite~] efficiently (this could maybe be done with a loadbang > > routine that would send a message to a subpatch in the abstraction > > instance to add and connect a delwrite~ with the proper delay > > allocation...). > > You don't need to set the block~-size to 1, and personally I would > just make the delwrite~ "big enough". It's cheap to store things in a > delay. But anyway, attached is a z~-clone with delwrite~/delread~ that > uses a helper abstraction created dynamically. > > Ciao > -- > Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__ > _______________________________________________ > PD-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list