On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Lorenzo Sutton <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 06/12/12 15:31, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > >> >> Leaving out [rate~] should use less CPU since [rate~] doesn't have to do >> the analysis part, if I understand it correctly. >> > > If I understand correctly what rate~ does, the argument is actually a > factor, so I thnk the frequency for the phasor~ has to be 1 / factor... So > for example > > [rate~ 1.5] > > is [phasor~ 0.666667] > > Lorenzo. > "rate~ accepts an input signal from a phasor~ and time scales it by a multiplier received as a float in its right inlet". This is what the help patch says. Although, in the oscilloscope of the patch it looks like it is divided indeed. Dunno.. > >> >> >> >> .hc >> >> On Dec 6, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Alexandros Drymonitis wrote: >> >> Don't think I really follow. Each [rate~] actually outputs a [phasor~] >>> with a different frequency (different frequency ratio), all driven by the >>> same [phasor~]. How can you send a value from one number box to all >>> [phasor~]s? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner >>> <[email protected]<mailto: >>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Why not just use a phasor~ per rate~ and then have the frequency >>> of all them controlled by the same number box? >>> >>> .hc >>> >>> On Dec 6, 2012, at 8:57 AM, Alexandros Drymonitis wrote: >>> >>> copy this patch >>>> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=6P4Ezz9aWa8&feature=plcp<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P4Ezz9aWa8&feature=plcp> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:55 PM, Simon Iten <[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> What are you trying to accomplish? >>>> >>>> On Dec 6, 2012 2:48 PM, "Alexandros Drymonitis" >>>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> How can one implement Max's [rate~] in Pd? [rate~] takes >>>> a signal from a [phasor~] and according to its argument >>>> it scales the frequency (roughly speaking). So >>>> >>>> [phasor~ 1] >>>> | >>>> [rate~ 1.5] >>>> >>>> will actually give a [phasor~ 1.5]. I thought of [wrap] >>>> but that won't do the trick with non-integers. >>>> Any ideas? >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> mailing list >>>> >>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>> >>>> http://lists.puredata.info/**listinfo/pd-list<http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >>>> >>>> >>>> ______________________________**_________________ >>>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> mailing list >>>> >>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>> >>>> http://lists.puredata.info/**listinfo/pd-list<http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> [email protected] mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/** >> listinfo/pd-list <http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >> > > > ______________________________**_________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/** > listinfo/pd-list <http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
