Re: [PD] Rotating object rolling on irregular terrain
# Hi Andy, # I have an idea but I think it is more CPU hungry than calculating square roots, so it is useless :-) # There should be three tables. First one keeps the last N samples of the incoming signal (surface). It is like an oscilloscope which updates at every sample. Second one is a static N sample table. It includes the shape of the cylinder (bottom half part of the circle) where the radius R of the circle is equal or less than N/2. # At every sample you should let the cylinder fall from high above to the ground in the vertical direction. When the curve of the half circle meets the surface you get the vertical position of the cylinder! # But I can not find a good algorithm for this collision detection. You can take the difference of every point in cylinder table from the surface table. (Third table is this difference table) If a point have a value zero or something that point is the point of intersection. You now the initial height of the circle and how much you lowered it. The last position is the output of this filter. So simple :-) -ugur guney- On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Andy Farnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm trying to obtain a waveform for a rolling cylinder on an irregular > surface. The signature looks like the attached, or see this paper. > > https://www.enactivenetwork.org/download.php?id=97 > > Rath gives a formula that uses a square root, which I want to avoid. > > Several methods I've tried, based on samplehold and a parabolic > shaper almost get there, but I can't quite crack this one. > > It is the circular motion of the cylinder rotating around the last > maxima and truncated by the intersection of the radius with the next > minima. > > I want to generate it from a samplehold noise (step waveform) source > in real time, so no look ahead or tables (although delaying by > some blocks is okay) > > I've tried integrating and shaping the step wave, but it's not right :( > > Now I can't see the wood for the trees and think I'm missing something > really obvious. > > Any geometry experts got an idea? > > Preferably something only in the signal domain. > > Cheers, > > Andy > > > -- > Use the source > > ___ > 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] some objects in the extra folder do not load
# Hi, # I just downloaded and installed the new Pd-extended 40.3 for Windows. The new look is wonderful. Thanks for your effort! # I encounter with a problem which I had before too. Some objects in the "extra" folder does not load when I browse through the Pd Browser under the "5. reference/". As a specific example in the "5. reference/bassemu/bassemu-help~.pd" the [bassemu~] object does not be loaded. I look in my "C:\music\pd-ext40.3\extra\bassemu" folder and there exist the "bassemu~.dll" file. So the file is there but PD does not load it. # Can you show me how I can handle this situation. This problem is true for many other objects I really want to try, ie. sssad, memento, boid2d, iemtab, msd etc. -ugur- ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] some objects in the extra folder do not load
you will need to specify paths to subdirectories inside your extra folder too. ie, you will need to add C:\music\pd-ext40.3\extra\bassemu ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 21:25 +, Andy Farnell wrote: > On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 > marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Frank Barknecht wrote: > > > Hallo, > > > Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: > > > > > >> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's > > >> comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to Pd, both > > >> are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one sparkles while > > >> the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. > > > > > > Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. > > > > so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? > > marius. > > > Because it's optimised for real-time performance. > > Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. > The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was designed > for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU speeds. sounds reasonable. however, i would be interested to have some illustration of that. what is it, that makes the difference? i'd be most interested to see examples on a rather low level (oscillators, ramp generators etc). the code for both is open, so it should be feasible to find some differences, if there are any. basically, this means also, that it is not possible to generate any intended signal with pd. is that true? roman ___ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
On Sat, 2008-03-08 at 14:15 -0500, Martin Peach wrote: > Yeah but mp3s always sound muddy to me... would it be possible to post some flac versions of those pieces? roman > Andy Farnell wrote: > > > > I looked for some sounds that demonstrate the difference of oscillator > > accuracy. All I could find are these two snips from tracks, but it's a > > fair comparison because; > > > > 1) "Functions of Time" (1996) An all Csound composition. > > http://www.obiwannabe.co.uk/sounds/FunctionsOfTime-track3.mp3 > > > > 2) "Look Ma, No hands!" (2005) An all Pd composition. > > http://www.obiwannabe.co.uk/sounds/Nohands-short.mp3 > > > > Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's > > comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to Pd, both > > are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one sparkles while > > the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. > > > > It would be good to do a Max vs Pd comparison of the same someday. > > > > a. > > > > > > On Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:02:00 -0500 > > marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> what I experience sometimes when I do very basic stuff like using > >> phasors, is that I hear weird comb filtering of my environment after I > >> put down my headphones. similar as if you look into bright light and > >> then close the eyes, and you still see a review-image. > >> regarding the difference between pd and max: are you talking about the > >> music that people produce or are you talking about the digital signal > >> process? > >> m. > >> > >> Damian Stewart wrote: > >>> hey, > >>> > >>> i was talking to a Portuguese musician tonight (Miguel Cardoso is his > >>> name) > >>> and he was saying that he thought that Pd sounded much better than Max - > >>> a > >>> fuller sound with the oscillators, he said. > >>> > >>> i hadn't really thought about this before, but i do know that to my ears > >>> my > >>> Pd patches sound a lot richer than most Max/MSP stuff that I've heard - > >>> not > >>> sure whether that's my source material or patches or whether it's at a > >>> deeper architectural level than that. > >>> > >>> anyone have any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, to confirm this? > >>> reasons > >>> why this might be the case? > >>> > >> > >> ___ > >> 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 ___ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Rotating object rolling on irregular terrain
i just did a simple load test on [sqrt~], which the documentation states is a 'fast, approximate algorithm'... i made: [sig~ 5] | [sqrt~] and copied that dozens of times with only a small jump in cpu usage. is it the cpu usage that's the problem? or something else? ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[PD] ERROR: can't load library in vbap_ext
vbap error in pd-extended [import]: ERROR: can't load library in vbap_ext this is all i can find out from google but this is quite old and maybe not relevant http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-cvs/2007-09/012699.html Pd version 0.41-1extended-20080227 compiled 07:30:28 Feb 27 2008 thanks rob c ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
> When will they come up with the PD to CSound python conversion script? Drizzly drol.. if it's ever possible have a nice day km ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] some objects in the extra folder do not load
Or use [import bassemu] or just change the object name to [bassemu/ bassemu~] .hc On Mar 9, 2008, at 8:19 AM, hard off wrote: you will need to specify paths to subdirectories inside your extra folder too. ie, you will need to add C:\music\pd-ext40.3\extra\bassemu ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ listinfo/pd-list ¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido! ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
On Mar 8, 2008, at 11:00 PM, Chuckk Hubbard wrote: > On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 4:59 AM, Andy Farnell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> You take as many sines as the system will handle, typically >> a thousand or so, and sum them. All must start on exactly the >> same phase. Now, if we had a series of _all_ frequencies it would >> give us an impulse, but instead set the difference between each >> oscillator to be 1 cycle + delta, where delta is very small, maybe >> 1Hz or less. > > This is an interesting concept, thanks for passing it along. > >> Hardly very scientific, but roughly from the few chances I've had >> to try it on different systems... >> >> Csound - the King, all bow before Csound > > yeah boyee To muddy the waters a bit, the most 'correct' sound isn't always the best sound. Consider so many people's love of tube amps. They have higher distorsion than transistor amps, yet so many people think they sound better. .hc All mankind is of one author, and is one volume; when one man dies, one chapter is not torn out of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated -John Donne ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP blocks. Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it 64bit under any circumstances?) cheers, ~brandon On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote: > On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 > marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Frank Barknecht wrote: >>> Hallo, >>> Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: >>> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to Pd, both are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one sparkles while the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. >>> >>> Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. >> >> so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? >> marius. > > > Because it's optimised for real-time performance. > > Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. > The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was > designed > for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU > speeds. > > Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a > raytracing > scene in 3DMax. > > In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we > could > say "what did you expect?!" > > > > > >> >> ___ >> PD-list@iem.at mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > > -- > Use the source > > ___ > 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
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
It could be, it's just a matter of someone writing the code :) That's why I proposed the 'cleansound' library. .hc On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:01 PM, bsoisoi wrote: > Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these > days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP > blocks. Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it > 64bit under any circumstances?) > > cheers, > ~brandon > > > On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote: > >> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 >> marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Frank Barknecht wrote: Hallo, Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: > Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's > comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to > Pd, both > are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one > sparkles while > the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. >>> >>> so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? >>> marius. >> >> >> Because it's optimised for real-time performance. >> >> Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. >> The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was >> designed >> for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU >> speeds. >> >> Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a >> raytracing >> scene in 3DMax. >> >> In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we >> could >> say "what did you expect?!" >> >> >> >> >> >>> >>> ___ >>> PD-list@iem.at mailing list >>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/ >>> listinfo/pd-list >> >> >> -- >> Use the source >> >> ___ >> 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 "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from scarcity."-John Gilmore ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > To muddy the waters a bit, the most 'correct' sound isn't always the > best sound. Consider so many people's love of tube amps. They have > higher distorsion than transistor amps, yet so many people think they > sound better. i remember reading about people recreating the Roland 303 and one of the things that made its distinctive sound was that the original power supply was a bit crappy and couldn't really handle it - in fact if you wound up one the filters' resonance too high it would be drawing more power than was available, which would lead to all sorts of fun distortion across the whole circuit. one of my aims for the next little while is to build a pd external that tries to mathematically model the distortion that's going on when an analog (transistor or tube-based) circuit is overpowered, perhaps on a molecular level, to get a nicer sound when i push the delay feedback up too high (which i like to do). lalala... ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[PD] [PD-announce] inside the wave
hi, I did some Pd programming for an exhibition in the San Diego Museum of Art. http://www.sdmart.org/exhibition-future.html#inside-the-wave. I worked with Nina Waisman from the "particle group" and the sound installation is part of a bigger concept about nanotechnology. It is based on work we did last year for Berlin and will be up until June 22. more information at nina's site http://www.ninawaisman.net including a demo video http://www.ninawaisman.net/nano/nanoEmbed.html. marius. ___ PD-announce mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-announce ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] [PD-announce] inside the wave
Are you still in san diego? On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 11:51 AM, marius schebella < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > hi, > I did some Pd programming for an exhibition in the San Diego Museum of > Art. http://www.sdmart.org/exhibition-future.html#inside-the-wave. > I worked with Nina Waisman from the "particle group" and the sound > installation is part of a bigger concept about nanotechnology. > It is based on work we did last year for Berlin and will be up until > June 22. > more information at nina's site http://www.ninawaisman.net including a > demo video http://www.ninawaisman.net/nano/nanoEmbed.html. > marius. > > ___ > PD-announce mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-announce > > ___ > PD-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > -- Jaime E Oliver LR [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.realidadvisual.org/jaimeoliver www-crca.ucsd.edu/ www.realidadvisual.org 9168 Regents Rd. Apt. G La Jolla, CA 92037 USA ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] [PD-announce] inside the wave
no, I haven't been there at all! we met in NYC, and then I did the programming in new york, and nina set it up in san diego. m. Jaime Oliver wrote: > Are you still in san diego? > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 11:51 AM, marius schebella < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> hi, >> I did some Pd programming for an exhibition in the San Diego Museum of >> Art. http://www.sdmart.org/exhibition-future.html#inside-the-wave. >> I worked with Nina Waisman from the "particle group" and the sound >> installation is part of a bigger concept about nanotechnology. >> It is based on work we did last year for Berlin and will be up until >> June 22. >> more information at nina's site http://www.ninawaisman.net including a >> demo video http://www.ninawaisman.net/nano/nanoEmbed.html. >> marius. >> >> ___ >> PD-announce mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-announce >> >> ___ >> 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
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Why can't we simply have the option to turn up (or turn down!) the resolution of the objects we already have? This is considerably less complex. ~Brandon On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:08 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > It could be, it's just a matter of someone writing the code :) > That's why I proposed the 'cleansound' library. > > .hc > > On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:01 PM, bsoisoi wrote: > >> Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these >> days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP >> blocks. Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it >> 64bit under any circumstances?) >> >> cheers, >> ~brandon >> >> >> On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 >>> marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Frank Barknecht wrote: > Hallo, > Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: > >> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's >> comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to >> Pd, both >> are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one >> sparkles while >> the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. > > Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? marius. >>> >>> >>> Because it's optimised for real-time performance. >>> >>> Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. >>> The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was >>> designed >>> for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU >>> speeds. >>> >>> Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a >>> raytracing >>> scene in 3DMax. >>> >>> In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we >>> could >>> say "what did you expect?!" >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Use the source >>> >>> ___ >>> 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 > > > > > > "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are > deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from > scarcity."-John Gilmore > > ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
You can already do that by setting the sample rate as high or low as your hardware will support and using the [block~] object to set the control rate to the resolution you want. It would be interesting to try to build pd using doubles instead of floats, but it would necessitate changing the size of atoms... Max/MSP uses doubles everywhere for its 'floats'. Martin Brandon Zeeb wrote: > Why can't we simply have the option to turn up (or turn down!) the > resolution of the objects we already have? This is considerably less > complex. > ~Brandon > > > On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:08 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > >> It could be, it's just a matter of someone writing the code :) >> That's why I proposed the 'cleansound' library. >> >> .hc >> >> On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:01 PM, bsoisoi wrote: >> >>> Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these >>> days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP >>> blocks. Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it >>> 64bit under any circumstances?) >>> >>> cheers, >>> ~brandon >>> >>> >>> On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote: >>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Frank Barknecht wrote: >> Hallo, >> Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: >> >>> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's >>> comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to >>> Pd, both >>> are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one >>> sparkles while >>> the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. >> Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. > so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? > marius. Because it's optimised for real-time performance. Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was designed for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU speeds. Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a raytracing scene in 3DMax. In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we could say "what did you expect?!" > ___ > PD-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list -- Use the source ___ 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 >> >> >> >> >> "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are >> deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from >> scarcity."-John Gilmore >> >> > > > ___ > 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
Re: [PD] [PD-announce] inside the wave
I was about to offer you a beer... I've read you too much without actually talking. J On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 12:16 PM, marius schebella < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > no, I haven't been there at all! we met in NYC, and then I did the > programming in new york, and nina set it up in san diego. > m. > > Jaime Oliver wrote: > > Are you still in san diego? > > > > On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 11:51 AM, marius schebella < > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> hi, > >> I did some Pd programming for an exhibition in the San Diego Museum of > >> Art. http://www.sdmart.org/exhibition-future.html#inside-the-wave. > >> I worked with Nina Waisman from the "particle group" and the sound > >> installation is part of a bigger concept about nanotechnology. > >> It is based on work we did last year for Berlin and will be up until > >> June 22. > >> more information at nina's site http://www.ninawaisman.net including a > >> demo video http://www.ninawaisman.net/nano/nanoEmbed.html. > >> marius. > >> > >> ___ > >> PD-announce mailing list > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-announce > >> > >> ___ > >> 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 > > -- Jaime E Oliver LR [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.realidadvisual.org/jaimeoliver www-crca.ucsd.edu/ www.realidadvisual.org 9168 Regents Rd. Apt. G La Jolla, CA 92037 USA ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Most Pd objects (externals) use t_sample to define what gets passed to input and output. At compilation time, the externals code includes m_pd.h, which defines t_sample as a float. Which makes sense on 32-bit processors--Pd for 64-bit processors could potentially redefine t_sample as a double, with no loss in performance (with nearly twice as much memory usage). I am aware that there are some other problems involved with making Pd accessible as either 32-bit or 64-bit resolution, but I'm not so deep into the source code to tell you what they all are. Chuck On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Brandon Zeeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why can't we simply have the option to turn up (or turn down!) the > resolution of the objects we already have? This is considerably less > complex. > ~Brandon > > > On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:08 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > > > > It could be, it's just a matter of someone writing the code :) > > That's why I proposed the 'cleansound' library. > > > > .hc > > > > On Mar 9, 2008, at 2:01 PM, bsoisoi wrote: > > > >> Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these > >> days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP > >> blocks. Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it > >> 64bit under any circumstances?) > >> > >> cheers, > >> ~brandon > >> > >> > >> On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote: > >> > >>> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500 > >>> marius schebella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > Frank Barknecht wrote: > > Hallo, > > Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote: > > > >> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's > >> comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to > >> Pd, both > >> are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one > >> sparkles while > >> the Pd one sounds a bit muddy. > > > > Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles. > > so why is then "pure" data not equally clean? > marius. > >>> > >>> > >>> Because it's optimised for real-time performance. > >>> > >>> Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability. > >>> The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was > >>> designed > >>> for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU > >>> speeds. > >>> > >>> Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a > >>> raytracing > >>> scene in 3DMax. > >>> > >>> In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we > >>> could > >>> say "what did you expect?!" > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > ___ > PD-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Use the source > >>> > >>> ___ > >>> 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > "[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are > > deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from > > scarcity."-John Gilmore > > > > > > > ___ > 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
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Brandon Zeeb wrote: > Why can't we simply have the option to turn up (or turn down!) the > resolution of the objects we already have? This is considerably less > complex. yes, from a users point of view. from a programmers point of view it is considerably more complex. fmadsrö IOhannes ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > It could be, it's just a matter of someone writing the code :) well, it's almost done. within the next month or 2, i will hopefully have all patches ready, to make Pd fully "double floating point" enabled (that is: you have to chose at compile time; all externals have to be recompiled for this; and no, i have no plans to get a dual-precision (both 32bit and 64bit) support into Pd) what is more, just raising the precision won't necessarily boost the cleanness of the sound (btw, this is not the objective of my double Pd project); Pd could have better oscillators even with 32bit, by using better interpolation/extrapolation algorithms. mfga.dsr IOhannes ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Charles Henry wrote: > Most Pd objects (externals) use t_sample to define what gets passed to > input and output. At compilation time, the externals code includes > m_pd.h, which defines t_sample as a float. Which makes sense on 32-bit > processors--Pd for 64-bit processors could potentially redefine t_sample > as a double, with no loss in performance (with nearly twice as much > memory usage). that's the theory. in practice, even Pd-vanilla was using a wild mix of t_sample, t_float & float as sample-type until 0.41 (when i submitted a number of patches to clean that up) i have a basically running version of Pd with 64bit double precision, basically only some oscillators have to be ported (osc~, phasor~,... use lowest level bitmanipulation in their core-routines) playing soundfiles works fine :-) fgmadsr IOhannes ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
Martin Peach wrote: > It would be interesting to try to build pd using doubles instead of > floats, but it would necessitate changing the size of atoms... see my other post: this is basically done. on 64bit OS the size of atoms would stay the same (it's at least 64bit because of the pointers) fgadsmr, IOhannes ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] searchpath inside patch
Hi, is the [declare] object only available in PD releases higher 0.40 ? I'm using pd-extended 0.39.3. Achim Frank Barknecht schrieb: > Hallo, > Claude Heiland-Allen hat gesagt: // Claude Heiland-Allen wrote: > >> I think recent Pd's have a system for adding paths in patches, but I've >> never used that feature. > > That system is [declare -path abs/]. It may currently not work inside > abstractions. > > Ciao -- Achim Bornhoeft - Neckarhalde 38, D-72070 Tuebingen -.-. tel/fax +49 (0)7071 942745 -... mobil +49 (0)179 6936930 skype:achim.bornhoeft?call -- ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] searchpath inside patch
On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 22:06 +0100, Achim Bornhoeft wrote: > Hi, > is the [declare] object only available in PD releases higher 0.40 ? yep, exactly. roman ___ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 21:05 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > Pd could have better oscillators even with 32bit, by using better > interpolation/extrapolation algorithms. yo.. would be interesting to hear (for non-dsp experts as me), _what_ could be improved, respectively _what_ is _not_ optimal in pd. could you (or someone else) elaborate that a bit? are you saying, that [osc~] is not generating a clean sine wave? what would you expect from a [phasor~] differently from what it currently does? what kind of algorithms are you talking about? what are they supposed to improve? roman ___ Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
[osc~] seems to use a 512-float table with linear interpolation, so it could be made better by increasing the size and/or resolution of the table and/or using a better interpolation algorithm. Martin Roman Haefeli wrote: > On Sun, 2008-03-09 at 21:05 +0100, IOhannes m zmölnig wrote: > >> Pd could have better oscillators even with 32bit, by using better >> interpolation/extrapolation algorithms. > > yo.. would be interesting to hear (for non-dsp experts as me), _what_ > could be improved, respectively _what_ is _not_ optimal in pd. could you > (or someone else) elaborate that a bit? are you saying, that [osc~] is > not generating a clean sine wave? what would you expect from a [phasor~] > differently from what it currently does? what kind of algorithms are you > talking about? what are they supposed to improve? > > roman > > > > > > > ___ > Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de > > > ___ > 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
Re: [PD] Pd sounds better than Max?
On Sunday 09 March 2008 19:59, Charles Henry wrote: > Pd for 64-bit processors could potentially redefine t_sample as > a double, with no loss in performance (with nearly twice as much memory > usage). Mno... It just so happens that x87s always compute a double, so it makes little difference there. What you're forgetting is that if you're using SIMD (for example SSE2) using doubles means you can only fit two samples into a vector register instead of four. Half the throughput. On top of that, if you check instruction tables, packed double instructions have a slightly higher latency than packed singles. For the core2 at least. Not everything (even 64bit) uses an x87. robert. ___ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
