Yeah, a threshold~ set to 1 is never triggered (or very rarely). So there's no perfect answer to the question it seems...
Pierre 2011/9/20 Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com> > On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 09:43 +0200, Pierre Massat wrote: > > I m curious to know which object you would recommend instead of > > threshold~ (the delay way is obviously not feasible as soon as you > > need to change the speed of phasor~ during palyback). > > Yeah, [threshold~] seems feasible, but this approach suffers from a few > issues. As I said before, the bang comes only on block boundaries and is > at least one block late, so it's not very precise. Also, a [phasor~] > probably never reaches exactly 1 (or 0) and it is less likely the higher > the frequency is. So you would need values like 0.001 or 0.999 for the > [threshold~] which again makes it a bit more imprecise. > > You can also use the [vline~] approach and change the speed in the > middle of the playback, though it needs a bit of patching to accomplish > that. You need a delay, that is triggered at the time of the speed > change. The delay value can be used to calculate the current position of > the play head. Then you can use that value as a start point for a new > message to [vline~]. > > Roman > > > > 2011/9/20 Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com> > > On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 14:00 -0700, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > > >From: tim vets <timv...@gmail.com> > > > >To: Pierre Massat <pimas...@gmail.com>; James Dunn > > <ja...@4thharmonic.com>; pd-list <pd-list@iem.at> > > > >Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 4:08 PM > > > >Subject: Re: [PD] stop sample playback when phasor~ reset? > > > > > > > > > > > >When you use phasor~, you normally already know how long it > > will take for the sound to be finished playing (because you > > set its frequency to play it back at the proper speed) > > > >Store the information about the sound loaded (or recorded) > > and use that to stop the playback after one play duration. > > > > > > > > > > > >[del <time>] > > > >| > > > >[t b b] > > > >| | > > > >[0( [0( > > > >[ | > > > >[phasor] > > > > > > What's the benefit of this over a line~ based approach? > > > > > > > [line~] is inferior to [phasor~] in that it only starts a ramp > > on block > > boundaries. Using [vline~] seems to me most flexible in terms > > of sample > > playback as it can start a ramp even in-between samples. > > > > Using [threshold~] or any other method to detect the reset of > > [phasor~] > > is not feasible, because of two reasons: > > * [threshold] (but also [snapshot~]) output the bang only at > > block > > bounaries, so the detection is not very precise > > * Whenever the the audio domain (a signal) causes an event in > > the > > message domain (that's what [threshold~] and [snapshot~] are > > for), the > > event is at least one block late. > > > > There is still one advantage of [phasor~] over [vline~]: The > > speed of > > the [phasor~] can be changed at signal rate, so one can create > > continuous pitch changes when playing the sample. That's not > > possible > > with [vline~]. > > > > Roman > > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list