Le 16/02/2024 à 19:16, Alexandre Torres Porres a écrit :
ok, one more thing...
The 1st is just a very basic implementation : it's not possible to
define a non-linear link for example.
The 2nd one solve them in a very simple scenario : 1 mass and 1 spring.
So it's not possible to create other network.
So Spring from SuperCollider is just a very simplified model, and according to
people in the SuperCollider forum it's not really different than a 2nd order
filter like Ringz or resonant~ from ELSE, right?
the SC spring is not a simplified model, it's the standard model. (you can only
add complexity to the classic MSS)
if you put 1 mass and 1 spring, you have a 1st order filter.
if you put two 1st order filter one after the other, you have one 2nd order
filter.
So I'm failing to see where SuperCollider's Spring shines. I already ported it
to a compiled Pd object, and I also ported the MAX code but I can't see why I
should bother including them or what would be special about them. I like the
Ball object from SC and that seems like something fun to have...
But then, I think I mentioned this before, I came across Spring in SC here on this code on
Scanned Synthesis https://sccode.org/1-4Rm <https://sccode.org/1-4Rm> it's just a chain
of Spring objects connected in a series, with a feedback loop, so it's circular. The output of
each spring is an audio channel output and an object crossfades between the channels and
"scans" it.
I don’t know anything about SC or Max, so I can't talk about that.
scann synth was propose when a 100 masses simulation need too much CPU to be
computed in real time at audio rate. So the shape of the string was only
computed at data rate.
if you use audio object, then it's not scanned synthesis. it's just PM audio
simulation.
So, your just mixing multiple things here, and I hardly understand this
discussion.
cheers
c
So now I wonder if Spring is indispensable in this patch, and if one can just use some other 2nd order filter instead. I am also presuming that there might be some technical details where the sheer simplicity of this setup misses some important factors that you are covering in your scannd synthesis implementations with pmpd, huh?>
Cheers
thanks for clarifying
But if you just want to play with meaningful parameter without
understanding the physics, then pmpd is not for you.
This is what I realize, and I would also like to have some higher level
ready made and easy to use toys for simple tasks.
there are lot's of software dedicated to MSS, the equations are all
about the same.
But physical modelling is broader than MSS.
sure, I see
Thanks for the references and answers.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
