Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-03 Thread Mathieu Bouchard

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011, Thomas Grill wrote:

Am 27.08.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Mathieu Bouchard:
Ears don't know what a wave function collapse is, and wouldn't 
differentiate quantum noise from a linear-congruential scrambler such as 
pd's [noise~].
i don't think that quantum noise is necessarily white in the audible 
domain.


Doesn't it depend on how it's recorded ?

Using a nonquantum example, if you record speaker membrane position as a 
function of time, store it in a table and then play it as if it had been 
recorded electrically, wouldn't it sound like it needs a big EQ ?


But then, if something quantum is gaussian, then its spectrum is gaussian 
too, and that needs quite trickier EQing in order to sound white.


In any case, once you EQ whichever noise source to sound like the other 
one, no-one can figure out which one is quantum just by ear. Thus, 
musically, it does not matter.


 ___
| Mathieu Bouchard  tél: +1.514.383.3801  Villeray, Montréal, QC___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2011-08-31 16:11, Michael Zacherl. wrote:
 despite what IOhannes pointed out (and I still agree with him) 

i do not doubt that there are many use cases where it is indeed a better
idea to avoid connections in favour of an accessing memory by name.

i only wanted to point out that it many cases it is not.


ghmsd
IOhannes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5fR2gACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvSU5gCeKKvqh17jnKrb887TMZMuGbyG
TWQAnAv9Ym9wthVqXni77aljNiRJPmN5
=0Jt3
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking 
 whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science 
 book.

Why? Randomness is epistemic.

Cheers,

Chris.

---
http://mccormick.cx

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Mathieu Bouchard

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:


On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking
whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science
book.


Why? Randomness is epistemic.


What does that mean to you ?

 ___
| Mathieu Bouchard  tél: +1.514.383.3801  Villeray, Montréal, QC
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:38:32PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:

 On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 03:59:14PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking
 whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science
 book.

 Why? Randomness is epistemic.

 What does that mean to you ?

Epistemic: Adjective - Of or relating to knowledge or to the degree of its 
validation.

It means I think that taking whatever currently looks the most impredictable 
thing in the science book is a good approach.

Don't run a lottery with Miller's [noise~] unless you like giving away money.

Cheers,

Chris.

---
http://mccormick.cx

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Mathieu Bouchard

On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:

Epistemic: Adjective - Of or relating to knowledge or to the degree of 
its validation. It means I think that taking whatever currently looks 
the most impredictable thing in the science book is a good approach. 
Don't run a lottery with Miller's [noise~] unless you like giving away 
money.


But in music, what is called noise has little to do with predictability of 
its samples, be it a snare drum sound, a white noise, or something from 
reality tv.


 ___
| Mathieu Bouchard  tél: +1.514.383.3801  Villeray, Montréal, QC
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-09-01 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 07:48:26PM -0400, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
 On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:

 Epistemic: Adjective - Of or relating to knowledge or to the degree of 
 its validation. It means I think that taking whatever currently looks  
 the most impredictable thing in the science book is a good approach.  
 Don't run a lottery with Miller's [noise~] unless you like giving away  
 money.

 But in music, what is called noise has little to do with predictability 
 of its samples, be it a snare drum sound, a white noise, or something 
 from reality tv.

Yes that's true.

Chris.

---
http://mccormick.cx

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-31 Thread Michael Zacherl.
Hi Jonathan, 
yeah, tables would work, I easily could keep them local any refer to the 
respective indices.
But then again, despite what IOhannes pointed out (and I still agree with him) 
I like the idea of using [value]s 
since I could use self explaining names, which would make the mess, in this 
particular case, better readable.

So from this POV I don't find your solution that ugly.

Thanks, Michael.



On 25.8.2011, at 18:21 , Jonathan Wilkes wrote:

 [v $0-myvalue] = associate the symbol $0-myvalue with a float value
 [expr $0-myvalue] = subtract the float value associated with the symbol 
 myvalue from $0
 
 Therefore, [expr] should always return the value of $0 (unless you're 
 assigning a value to myvalue somewhere)
 
 [expr]'s parser seems only to recognize an atom as a symbol when the first 
 character is not a number, so try the following workarounds:
 
 [expr _$0myvalue]
 [expr myvalue$0]
 
 Both are ugly.  If using tables you can avoid this mess by using an $s 
 variable.
 
 -Jonathan
 
 From: Michael Zacherl. sdiy-m...@blauwurf.info
 To: PD list pd-list@iem.at
 Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:19 AM
 Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?
 
 
 On 25.8.2011, at 14:43 , tim vets wrote:
 
  something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]?
  gr,
  Tim
 
 great, thanks Tim!  
 
 any chance to get $0 working?  [v $0-myvalue] is fine, [bang(--[expr 
 $0-myvalue]  (might be utterly wrong) delivers strange values, not even $0.
 
 Michael.
 
 --
 noise chasers: http://blauwurf.at 
 http://soundcloud.com/noiseconformist
 
 
 
 
 ___
 Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
 UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
 http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
 
 



--
keep your ears open: http://blauwurf.at
http://soundcloud.com/noiseconformist




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-29 Thread Thomas Grill


Am 27.08.2011 um 21:59 schrieb Mathieu Bouchard:

Ears don't know what a wave function collapse is, and wouldn't  
differentiate quantum noise from a linear-congruential scrambler  
such as pd's [noise~].




i don't think that quantum noise is necessarily white in the audible  
domain.

gr~~~


--
Thomas Grill
http://g.org



___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-27 Thread Mathieu Bouchard

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011, Chris McCormick wrote:


On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:

Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday:

you can't hear noise against noise :p


Interesting - but then again, what is noise?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse


Ears don't know what a wave function collapse is, and wouldn't 
differentiate quantum noise from a linear-congruential scrambler such as 
pd's [noise~].


You'll have to come up with a more phenomenological approach than picking 
whatever currently looks the most impredictable thing in the science book.


 ___
| Mathieu Bouchard  tél: +1.514.383.3801  Villeray, Montréal, QC
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-26 Thread Thomas Grill


Am 26.08.2011 um 04:06 schrieb Chris McCormick:


On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:

Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday:

you can't hear noise against noise :p


Interesting - but then again, what is noise?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse


Hmmm, i guess your point with the reference is that when perceiving  
one takes snapshots (measurements) of a statistical function (the wave  
function).
However, there are widespread methods to tell one statistical  
distribution (noise) from another one (noise).
See e.g. expectation maximization (EM) in (Gaussian) mixture models  
(GMM), a popular technique in Music Information Retrieval.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixture_model#Expectation_maximization_.28EM.29
Why shouldn't human listeners be able to maximize their expectations  
as well?


gr~~~


--
Thomas Grill
http://g.org
+43 699 19715543


___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Funs Seelen
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, tim vets timv...@gmail.com wrote:


 something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]?
 gr,
 Tim



I didn't know that one. Thanks!

[hsl]
|
[/ 127]
|
[v headphonesafe]

[noise~]
|
[*~ 99]
|
[clip~ -1 1]
|
[expr~ $v1*headphonesafe]
|\
|  \
[dac~]

--Funs
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Michael Zacherl.

On 25.8.2011, at 14:43 , tim vets wrote:

 something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]?
 gr,
 Tim

great, thanks Tim!  

any chance to get $0 working?  [v $0-myvalue] is fine, [bang(--[expr 
$0-myvalue]  (might be utterly wrong) delivers strange values, not even $0.

Michael.

--
noise chasers: http://blauwurf.at 
http://soundcloud.com/noiseconformist




___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Andrew Faraday

I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is there 
doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you zipper 
noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an audio alternative. Which is fine as it's 
like a combination of [s] and [f], but it does mean you can't receive audio 
values in [expr~]... as far as I can tell.
Andrew


Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 15:21:56 +0200
From: funssee...@gmail.com
To: timv...@gmail.com
CC: pd-list@iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?



On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:43 PM, tim vets timv...@gmail.com wrote:


something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]?gr,Tim 
I didn't know that one. Thanks!

[hsl]

|
[/ 127]
|
[v headphonesafe]

[noise~]
|
[*~ 99]
|
[clip~ -1 1]
|
[expr~ $v1*headphonesafe]
|\
|  \
[dac~]

--Funs


___
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] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread IOhannes m zmoelnig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 2011-08-25 17:32, Andrew Faraday wrote:
 
 I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is 
 there doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you 
 zipper noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an audio alternative. Which is 
 fine as it's like a combination of [s] and [f], but it does mean you can't 
 receive audio values in [expr~]... as far as I can tell.


tables?

pedagmode:ON
generally i would suggest to avoid such hidden data sharing whenever
possible.
while it might remove a number of ugly connections, it will also remove
a number of connections telling you where the data comes from.

connections are really Pd's strength, rather than it's weakness.
pedagmode:OFF

fgmasdr
IOhannes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk5WbYAACgkQkX2Xpv6ydvQScQCeORCAXleQp861wZvvHIneHx//
Le0AnRjROc/TECLGj8Sa4lpTRms+vNJ7
=wQ+g
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Funs Seelen
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Andrew Faraday jbtur...@hotmail.comwrote:

  I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is
 there doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you
 zipper noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an audio alternative. Which is
 fine as it's like a combination of [s] and [f], but it does mean you can't
 receive audio values in [expr~]... as far as I can tell.

 Andrew


O, my patch was just a wink to the `headphone' topic. It seems to me that
connecting [catch~ mysignal] to $v2 in [expr~] is the proper way, although I
cannot distinguish zippernoise from clipped [noise~] in the example. Isn't
an audio version of [value] an impossibility? How would you store a signal?
--Funs
___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Jonathan Wilkes
[v $0-myvalue] = associate the symbol $0-myvalue with a float value
[expr $0-myvalue] = subtract the float value associated with the symbol 
myvalue from $0

Therefore, [expr] should always return the value of $0 (unless you're assigning 
a value to myvalue somewhere)

[expr]'s parser seems only to recognize an atom as a symbol when the first 
character is not a number, so try the following workarounds:

[expr _$0myvalue]
[expr myvalue$0]

Both are ugly.  If using tables you can avoid this mess by using an $s variable.


-Jonathan





From: Michael Zacherl. sdiy-m...@blauwurf.info
To: PD list pd-list@iem.at
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?


On 25.8.2011, at 14:43 , tim vets wrote:

 something like [expr myvalue] and [v myvalue]?
 gr,
 Tim

great, thanks Tim!  

any chance to get $0 working?  [v $0-myvalue] is fine, [bang(--[expr 
$0-myvalue]  (might be utterly wrong) delivers strange values, not even $0.

Michael.

--
noise chasers: http://blauwurf.at 
http://soundcloud.com/noiseconformist




___
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] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Andrew Faraday

Nice obvious one there, Funs, you can't hear noise against noise :p

Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:17:16 +0200
Subject: Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?
From: funssee...@gmail.com
To: jbtur...@hotmail.com; Pd-list@iem.at



On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Andrew Faraday jbtur...@hotmail.com wrote:






I'm liking the look of this to streamline a few patches. Only trouble is there 
doesn't seem to be an audio rate version. So Funs' patch will give you zipper 
noise. [value] doesn't seem to have an audio alternative. Which is fine as it's 
like a combination of [s] and [f], but it does mean you can't receive audio 
values in [expr~]... as far as I can tell.

Andrew


O, my patch was just a wink to the `headphone' topic. It seems to me that 
connecting [catch~ mysignal] to $v2 in [expr~] is the proper way, although I 
cannot distinguish zippernoise from clipped [noise~] in the example. Isn't an 
audio version of [value] an impossibility? How would you store a signal?

--Funs

  ___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Thomas Grill

Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday:

 you can't hear noise against noise :p
 

Interesting - but then again, what is noise?
gr~~~



--
Thomas Grill
http://g.org

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list


Re: [PD] receiving messages in [expr] ?

2011-08-25 Thread Chris McCormick
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:20:47PM +0200, Thomas Grill wrote:
 Am 25.08.2011 um 19:40 schrieb Andrew Faraday:
  you can't hear noise against noise :p
 
 Interesting - but then again, what is noise?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave_function_collapse

Chris.

---
http://mccormick.cx

___
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management - 
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list