or [biquad~ 0 0 0 1] eni
Miller Puckette wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list