Good stuff, ok will do.
Thanks again,
Julian
On 17 February 2011 19:19, William Brent william.br...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, a Windows binary of [pitchEnv~] is up on my site:
http://williambrent.conflations.com/pages/research.html#pitchEnv
I hadn't put up Windows or the source yet because I
Ok, a Windows binary of [pitchEnv~] is up on my site:
http://williambrent.conflations.com/pages/research.html#pitchEnv
I hadn't put up Windows or the source yet because I was still in the
middle of working on it, but I think it's fine so that's all up now.
Let me know off list if you have issues
Thanks guys, that's really helpful - got things a bit straighter.
So can I say for clarification (and I noticed it came up on an earlier
thread when (of the top of my head) someone was asking why the attack
settings didn't work for tracks and they had to use [env~] -
vibrato
stabletime
minpower
Hey William,
Appreciate the involvement...
Unfortunately I'm on W7 atm. My main patch uses the MSD lib and after what
I thought was a trivial problem with using it in Puredyne (my regular
distro), last Nov, MSD is still not working for me. Fortunately I bought a
2nd hand lappy with W7 on it
Hey William,
Ho hum...,
Cheers for having a look though.
I'm not completely clear about the continuation flags? I can see from the
help file that they're there but what do they mean?
Perhaps this should be a new thread but why does sigmund have a frequency
range of 100,000hz, and what would
I'm not completely clear about the continuation flags? I can see from the
help file that they're there but what do they mean?
On every analysis period, several track reports are output in a burst.
These provide the frequency and amplitude of what [sigmund~]
considers the most important
Perhaps this should be a new thread but why does sigmund have a frequency
range of 100,000hz, and what would be a decent useable range from practical
experience?
Strange - I never read that part of the help patch carefully. It's
even stranger because it actually says the default
Hi Julian,
I just looked at the patches and I hear what you're talking about now.
The erratic changes are because it's really hard to get nice smooth
tracks by analyzing this kind of signal. With violin samples I got
useable results, but the rougher timbre of your viol has a lot of high
Hey William,
Many thanks for offering to have a look at this for me. I'm currently
trying to extricate the offending section out of what has now ballooned up
into a very involved patch (certainly for me anyway). In the process of
doing this I have realised that I am mistakenly constantly
I'm doing a piece with a viola d'amore (7 string viol)
Oops, that's not a violin :) I don't know the lowest note on that one
offhand...
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Could you make a simple example patch that demonstrates the
rhythmicized/pulsed result that you don't like? Without knowing
exactly what's going on in your patch, my first question would be
whether or not you're smoothing the frequencies and amplitudes with a
[line~] or something else. Maybe
On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, William Brent wrote:
I'm doing a piece with a viola d'amore (7 string viol)
Oops, that's not a violin :) I don't know the lowest note on that one
offhand...
Is everybody only ever using the default tuning on those things ?
Hi all,
I'm doing a piece with a viola d'amore (7 string viol) where [sigmund~] is
analysing the live input and feeding 48 tracks/partials to a bank of 48
[osc~] for resynthesis and a bit of jiggery-pokery, mainly reversing the
amplitudes so the quietest partials are the loudest and vice versa.
13 matches
Mail list logo
