• jameslo

    @Yar That sounds similar to the Pd help example I04.noisegate

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @porres Here's a comparison with cyclone/urn. Both are generating 4 element permutations, but urn sometimes generates a permutation that starts with the same number that the previous permutation ended with. Setting shuffle's 3rd arg to 0.25 guarantees that won't happen with 4+ element permutations.
    motex shuffle explanation.pd

    Screenshot 2026-03-16 200713.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    I've always liked motex/shuffle because it allows you to specify how soon a repetition can occur when you generate a new permutation. See the third argument:

    Screenshot 2026-03-16 031738.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @mrsean I wasn't really suggesting you use it. I was thinking of posting my own solution to your problem (which uses both expr and expr~) but when I looked more closely I realized that it's almost the same as yours except all in audio domain.

    posted in patch~ read more
  • jameslo

    @mrsean Is [expr] and [expr~] available in the heavy compiler?

    posted in patch~ read more
  • jameslo

    @raynovich Did you try increasing the delay in your audio interface settings? On one of my patches that fixes the drop out after I create and destroy the gem window once.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    I just got a fast new computer and I get a very short dropout on [create( but not [destroy(, so I guess that means "yes, that's just the way it is"?

    I wonder if you put the GEM stuff in another process (using [pd~]) and you didn't return any audio from that process whether that would address this issue? EDIT: nope, it doesn't. And launching the subprocess is even more disruptive.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @rewindForward In addition to sharing your patch (it could even be one using [expr~]), please let us know what your trigger signal is (i.e. I'm unclear why the signal is ~1 ms long)

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @whale-av I thought I had figured out the relationship between Q and BW but my patch failed miserably. So I just went with BW but got the same "close but no cigar" results:
    Screenshot 2026-01-20 110847.png
    Edit: looking back at that cookbook formula for notch coefficients (https://webaudio.github.io/Audio-EQ-Cookbook/audio-eq-cookbook.html), ff1 and ff3 are defined as 1/1+alpha, so the only way that could equal 1 is if alpha equals 0. But alpha is defined as sin(2 * pi * f / sr) / 2 * Q, so f would have to be 0 or Nyquist, or else Q is so large that it underflows the precision of the floats used to calculate the coefficients? And if it's the latter, then that seems like a weird thing to present as an illustrative example. (Note that in the example, f = 5512.5 = Nyquist/4--prob not a coincidence)

    I'm still mystified.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    In the help patch for [biquad~] there are coefficients for a very narrow bandstop filter centered at 5512.5 hz @ 44.1k or 6000 hz @ 48k. The filter's Q isn't stated so I thought I could reverse engineer it using those coefficients as my key but I can't seem to generate them exactly by using either my own coefficient calculator or the one from ELSE (bicoef2). I get close with a Q of about 3500, but I can't match all coefficients with a single Q value (I can't remember if the 1s are even posssible). Why would that be?
    help coefficients search.pd

    posted in technical issues read more

Internal error.

Oops! Looks like something went wrong!