Sorry, forgot ta add [change -1] after the [i].
I thought this was meant to be used with a MIDI signal - maybe I got that wrong? Ingo > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: pd-list-boun...@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-boun...@iem.at] Im Auftrag von > Roman Haefeli > Gesendet: Montag, 24. Februar 2014 10:34 > An: pd-list@iem.at > Betreff: Re: [PD] smooth random numbers > > On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 04:20 +0100, Ingo wrote: > > Starting from Roman's patch I would probably do it like the attached > patch. > > Many ways might solve a certain problem and in Pd those many ways can > often be divided into a "subtractive" approach - more than necessary is > generated and the overhead is filtered out afterwards - and an > "additive" approach - exactly the data needed is generated. > > I believe you totally missed the point why I chose the latter here. > Using a constant time grain for [line] generates too much data for slow > ramps, leading to many duplicates. Attach a print to our patch and > you'll see. At the same time it misses some integer numbers for fast > ramps. Also, by having a fixed time grain the result looks like a > resampled ramp (which it basically is), which means it is jittery and > doesn't emulate a steady movement of the fader. > > > Roman > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pd-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
