Katja thanks for your Inputs! Will Look at the Patch tonight. Simple lowpass Filtering? I tried to upsample with a Block object but the biquad object stopped outputting Pulses. If you don't mind doing a Version with upsampling that would be fantastic.
Well i just copied from the Gr300 schematic, so no credits for me :) Am 29.04.2014 um 13:12 schrieb katja <katjavet...@gmail.com>: > Hi Simon, > > So your method counts samples per (zero-crossing) cycle, is what I > learned from studying the patch. Very nice how you do this with tilde > objects. It seems possible to get equivalent result with only one > [rpole~], when using the positive pulse as trigger for [samphold~] and > with two samples delay for [rpole~]. You get the integrator's maximum > everytime. See attached patch. > > Of course it still counts integer number of samples. Upsampling would > indeed improve accuracy. An upsampled signal needs filtering to remove > spectral images, did you try that? > > Katja > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 8:10 AM, simon <itensi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> nice changes with expr~ ! but i think you missed the point of the beginning >> of the patch. read in my first e-mail for an explanation of what this patch >> does exactly. it is an gr300 analog guitar synthesizer clone (well one voice >> of it). it is intended for real-life signals so there needs to be an >> adaptive filter in the beginning (with the pitch info we get from the two >> rpole~ >> objects) and the signal needs to be squared to get the longest possible >> sustain (envelope is re added later obviously). also i think response is >> faster when squared, or not? >> >> thanks for the changes, greatly appreciated! >> >> simon >> >> Well i know exactly what the Patch does... I just dont know why the two >> numbers before the Addition Need to be -1 And -2 :-) >> >> Will Look at your Version asap. >> >> Cheers >> >> Am 29.04.2014 um 02:00 schrieb Alexandre Torres Porres <por...@gmail.com>: >> >> I have no idea what the patch is doing either, but I was able to clean it a >> lot. >> >> many things that didn't need to be there >> >> cheers >> >> >> 2014-04-28 3:52 GMT-03:00 Simon Iten <itensi...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> roman, thanks for your inputs. >>> >>> i tried both fexpr and expr and sticked to fexpr at some point, don’t know >>> why though. will change it back! (i remember reading that fexpr was more >>> expensive but also more precise) >>> >>> to make the whole thing work with real world signals (bass guitar in my >>> case) you have to add an adaptive filter in the beginning of the chain >>> (which is very easy because you get the frequency information hehe…) this >>> will filter out overtones and prevent octave jumping. >>> >>> thanks >>> >>> simon >>> >>> On 28 Apr 2014, at 08:39, Roman Haefeli <reduz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> That works very well. Good job and thanks for sharing! >>>> >>>> One minor thing jumped to my eye: Your patch uses some instances of >>>> [fexpr~] and all of them actually don't need [fexpr~] functionality. I >>>> experienced that [fexpr~] is quite expensive, which seems apparent >>>> considering it is designed for feedback algorithms. I don't know if >>>> [fexpr~] is also expensive when you use it not for feedbacks as your >>>> patch does. Anyway, you could replace them by likely less expensive >>>> [expr~] instances: >>>> >>>> [fexpr~ $x1>=0] -> [expr~ $v1>=0] >>>> >>>> Roman >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, 2014-04-28 at 00:59 +0200, simon wrote: >>>>> hey miller and list, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> find attached a version that works beautifully. it's a dirty hack >>>>> without upsampling but it works extremly well. don't ask me why, i have no >>>>> idea. >>>>> >>>>> thanks for all the help miller, really appreciate it! and thanks for pd >>>>> in general :-) >>>>> >>>>> cheers, >>>>> >>>>> simon >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 27, 2014, at 8:59 PM, Simon Iten wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> sorry this one went off-list :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 27 Apr 2014, at 19:05, simon <itensi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> sure, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> here is the version with biquad in a subpatch with a block opject to >>>>>>> upsample. probably i'm doing something wrong, i just copied from the >>>>>>> block >>>>>>> help-patch. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <sinetosawtoothupsample.pd> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 27, 2014, at 5:48 PM, Miller Puckette wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Drat, I don't have any explanation for this... can you send me the >>>>>>>> patch >>>>>>>> again? >>>>>>>> cheers >>>>>>>> M >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 05:44:22PM +0200, simon wrote: >>>>>>>>> hmm, changing change to biquad does also not work. i mean it does >>>>>>>>> as long as i don't upsample in the subpatch. as soon as i change the >>>>>>>>> block >>>>>>>>> object i get square instead of pulses... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 27, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Miller Puckette wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Actually I don't know where the change~ object is from - I've nver >>>>>>>>>> seen t >>>>>>>>>> before. I would just use biquad~ 0 0 1 -1 0 (assuming that >>>>>>>>>> change~ simply >>>>>>>>>> ubtracts the previous sample from teh current one as I guessed >>>>>>>>>> from the patch :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> M >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 03:40:01PM +0200, Simon Iten wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> ok tried to upsample the whole thing (after the osc~) and now >>>>>>>>>>> change~ does nothing anymore… it just spits out the same square >>>>>>>>>>> wave i feed >>>>>>>>>>> in…clues? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 27 Apr 2014, at 13:05, Simon Iten <itensi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> crosspost! sorry about the noise. thanks for the inputs i will >>>>>>>>>>>> try to to this. not sure if i can. otherwise i will ask back if >>>>>>>>>>>> that’s ok! >>>>>>>>>>>> On 27 Apr 2014, at 13:03, Simon Iten <itensi...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> so if i would measure at the peak of the sawtooth and would >>>>>>>>>>>>> upsample inside the pd patch, i would get higher resolution, >>>>>>>>>>>>> right? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> any ideas how i can measure at the peak? (using the rpole >>>>>>>>>>>>> output on both samphold inputs does not work and delaying one of >>>>>>>>>>>>> them is >>>>>>>>>>>>> also not working) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> i would highly recommend you try this method with your gk-3 >>>>>>>>>>>>> equipped guitar (one for each string) since you only have to >>>>>>>>>>>>> cover a two >>>>>>>>>>>>> octave range per string the error is tolerable. (you can add an >>>>>>>>>>>>> offset to >>>>>>>>>>>>> make it fit) >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 27 Apr 2014, at 12:56, Miller Puckette <m...@ucsd.edu> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is an excellent, witty way to measure pulse withs using >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only tilde obects - my hat's off to you. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The methond only has limited accuracy since its measurement is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> samples. For instance, a 1/2 cycle of a 440-hz. tone at 44.1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> kHz is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> only 50 samples, so there's only 2% accuracy. That's about >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1/3 of a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> half tone (30-ish cents) which would sound horribly out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tune. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's an alternative sine-to-sawtooth recipe described here: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://msp.ucsd.edu/Publications/icmc10.pdf >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the basis of my guitar processing patch, smeck, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> broadly useful. But it has its own limitations: the sawtooth >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you get out >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is wiggly if the input sn't a pure sinusoid. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> There's also the possibility of simply pitch tracking with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> sigmund~. Use >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a maximum frequency around 6000 and a maximum of 6 partals >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (default 50!) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for best results. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cheers >>>>>>>>>>>>>> M >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 11:27:33AM +0200, Simon Iten wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dear list, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i have a strange problem with my “sinetosawtooth” patch. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it is basically a version of the pitch to voltage conversion >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> used in the old gr300 guitar synths from roland. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i cut out all the clutter to make it easier to look at and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understand. (cut out the adaptive filtering at the input since >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i use a sine >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wave for this example and not a guitar string) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> here is how it works (or should): >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -an input signal gets amplified by a large factor and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clipped. this squares the input. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -the square wave is converted to pulses. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -the pulses from the rising of the square wave are used to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> set and reset an accumulating filter (rpole~) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this results in a sawtooth wave that varies in amplitude >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> depending on the frequency of the input. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -a sample and hold samples the peak of the sawtooth and holds >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it until the next peak occurs. this, after a conversion gives >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> us the input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency. yeah! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the example patch i used the falling edges of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> square wave to trigger the sample and hold. this samples the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sawtooth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amplitude after half the rising. (this is also why i have >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 22050 in fexpr~ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not 44100) i could not figure out how to sample the peak of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sawtooth, so suggestions here are very welcome. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now to the problem: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the extracted frequency does not exactly correspond to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> input frequency. it is pretty close at low frequencies but gets >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> worse at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> higher frequencies. the factor is not constant. at even higher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequencies >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (around 5000 hertz) the reported frequency gets totally out of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> control. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i first thought this is because the samphold~ object is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inaccurate. but i then saw that the sawtooth wave from the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rpole~ object has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no constant amplitude even with the input frequency not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing. so it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems that either rpole~ or change~ is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or the problem is that i sample in the middle of the rising >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and not at the top ( as described earlier) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> attached the sinetosawtooth patch. set your sound card to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 44100 or change the 22050 in fexpr~ to half the sampling >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i would really appreciate if somebody could have a look at >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks, simon >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> >> <sinetosawtooth-II.pd> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > <sinetosawtooth2.pd> _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list