Hi list,
There had been some talks on Pd issue
"https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/issues/2134; about "block
computation".
We are moving it here if there's need to do further talking and
clarifications. You are all invited to read it and give any insights.
:)
--
Mensaje telepatico
Thank you both, I understand now what I was doing wrong!
El jue., 23 jul. 2020 a las 19:03, Miller Puckette ()
escribió:
> Here's an abstraction I call rampdown~ - any time you want you can bang the
> second inlet (control) and simultaneously cut off (brutally zero out) the
> left (audio) inlet,
Here's an abstraction I call rampdown~ - any time you want you can bang the
second inlet (control) and simultaneously cut off (brutally zero out) the
left (audio) inlet, as if you were stealing a voice that was actively
playing. I use this quite a bit for monophonic voice stealing, as when you
Hello list,
I'm working through "The theory and technique of electronic music" for the
second time and having some trouble implementing the switch-and-ramp
technique described in 4.3.2. I understand the concept but my current
implementation clicks harshly when I retrigger the envelope.
Does
I'm holding off on this until I can do it coherently with two other
extensions I'm planning to the switch~/block~ objects (to allow multichannel
signals and to manage sample rates better).
cheers
Miller
On Sun, Apr 09, 2017 at 12:51:49AM +0200, Matt Davey wrote:
> i've always been annoyed that
i've always been annoyed that [switch~] is off by default.
could we at least get a creation argument to turn it on???
Miller? Please?
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
Hi all,
I noticed that having [switch~ 0] within abstractions like [pd module1] and so
on, do not seem to save their DSP resources as expected.
Is it something wrong?
Thanks in advance,
josep m
___
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and
