Hallo,
Steffen Juul hat gesagt: // Steffen Juul wrote:
I gotta point out that my intention was not to be rude, but rather to
point out that if, and i may very well be wrong, z~ implementations
need dynamic patching which is an unsupported feature then its not a
robust solution hence not
On 25/04/2008, at 19.25, Steffen Juul wrote:
On 25/04/2008, at 18.34, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo,
Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote:
Fundamentally, [z~] is a *very* useful primitive to have
I think, fundamentally z~ is just delread~/delwrite~ with a different
way to
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
Enrique Erne wrote:
or [biquad~ 0 0 0 1]
Miller Puckette wrote:
I believe z~ is just rzero~ 0.
no.
both of them are equivalent to [z~ 1]
you could also argue that [f] is just the same as [0(
:-)
oups, yes ofcorse z~ 1.
the output of 1 sample with rzero~ 0, z~
Enrique Erne wrote:
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
Enrique Erne wrote:
or [biquad~ 0 0 0 1]
Miller Puckette wrote:
I believe z~ is just rzero~ 0.
no.
both of them are equivalent to [z~ 1]
you could also argue that [f] is just the same as [0(
:-)
oups, yes ofcorse z~ 1.
the output of
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
Enrique Erne wrote:
IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
Enrique Erne wrote:
or [biquad~ 0 0 0 1]
Miller Puckette wrote:
I believe z~ is just rzero~ 0.
no.
both of them are equivalent to [z~ 1]
you could also argue that [f] is just the same as [0(
:-)
oups, yes ofcorse z~
I think this is my mistake -- as someone else pointed out, it should have
been rzero_rev~, not rzero 1 -- sorry for the confusion.
Miller
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 04:08:38PM +0100, Andy Farnell wrote:
I've attached again an example of a patch that demonstrates the
practical difference
Hello,
For [z~ 1] you can use [rzero_rev~ 0] -- its response is:
y[n] = -a[n] * x[n] + x[n-1]
setting the coefficient to 0 gets rid of the current input and leaves
the one-sample delay.
Thanks,
Matt
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:21:54 +0200
From: IOhannes m zm?lnig [EMAIL PROTECTED]
this, or use the suggestion IOhannes made some posts ago:
http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-04/061576.html
roman
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 11:47 -0400, Matt Barber wrote:
Hello,
For [z~ 1] you can use [rzero_rev~ 0] -- its response is:
y[n] = -a[n] * x[n] + x[n-1]
Hallo,
Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote:
Fundamentally, [z~] is a *very* useful primitive to have
I think, fundamentally z~ is just delread~/delwrite~ with a different
way to specify delay times, slightly better performance because it
doesn't allow many things delread~/delwrite~
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 16:08 +0100, Andy Farnell wrote:
I've attached again an example of a patch that demonstrates the
practical difference between different one sample differentiators.
Try replacing [fexpr~ $x1 - $x1[-1]] in the water flow generator with
/ \
| [z~]
| |
[-~]
|
10 matches
Mail list logo
