this seems like a great approach. thanks! my only concern is, that there will be nothing fast enough to detect my 30-1200 pulses per second... and i also don't think bangs can be sent that precisely, or can they? On Jul 17, 2012, at 12:13 AM, Funs Seelen wrote:
> Hi Simon, > > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Simon Iten <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> is there a way to achieve this without the signal accumulator object? i feel >> like there should be an easy solution but i can't seem to find it. any >> hints? >> > > If you mean the following, where x is the input and y the output.. > > y += x; > > and that for each sample.. > > then [biquad~] might be a solution: > > [sig~ 1] > | > | [clear( > | / > [biquad~ 1 0 1 0 0] > | > > This adds the last output to the current input. The [clear( message > resets biquad~ to 0. Now you just have to find a method to translate > your pulse to a bang. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
