Greetings,
Well, I used two [vline~] objects and it works fine, but only when I
set the right input one of the one [expr~] to 0 and the other to 1, which
both lead to division through 0 and the corresponding error message. I
believe you mentioned this problem, Mr. Farnell, regarding your own
[vline~] is versatile :) It can be used to solve many problems
with envelopes. Also, don't be scared to use two vlines if
it makes the problem easier to understand, their good time accuracy
ensures they will do what you expect most times.
On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 01:22:34 +0200
Stephan Elliot Perez
Thanks for your response. I tried to apply the branching principal using
the equation from the [exact-ead~] by having the envelope go to 1 and then
to 2 instead of 0, using min 1 and max 1 to create a branch, using an
expression to convert the ascending numbers over 1 into descending numbers
Greetings,
Thank you for your responses. I tried your suggestion, hardoff, and
the result is the attached [ead-reverse~]. Unfortunately, the expression
behaves differently with this [vline~]-construction as with the [phasor~].
Here, if 1 is entered into the right input of [expr~], the
You might be able to easily get that behaviour by
quickly editing the example I gave you.
The maths is really geometry.
There are a few things that can be done as time domain
transforms when thinking about envelopes and suchlike
in this way.
1) Flip it around zero with [*~ -1]
2) Invert
Greetings,
I wish to produce a wave form with the opposite form of the normal
ead~ wave (the curves become exponentially steeper instead of flatter),
which I can achieve by entering a negative number into the phasor in hard
off's exact-ead~ patch, which I downloaded from the archive.
instead of the [phaser~], send a [line~] (or [vline~]) signal.
for example:
[1, 0.5 500, 0 1000 500(
|
[vline~]
like most of my patches, i don't think i originally made that one, someone
else posted it, and i just copied. ;)
must have been a long time ago though, cos i barely remember it.
