@ben.wes You could use [cpole~] instead of [rpole~] like this: audio-rate-toggle.pd

@manuels said:

@ben.wes You could use [cpole~] instead of [rpole~] like this: audio-rate-toggle.pd

thanks! - this seems very interesting! i never used [cpole~] so far and will play around a bit with it these days. but i admit that i don't get yet how i would use these states here to "disarm" the flipflop mechanism immediately after a switch?

@ben.wes Oh, I think I completely missed your point ...

If I now do understand correctly, a simple solution might be to disarm the switch after every crossing instead every switch, because then you don't need feedback ... switchoncross-disarm.pd

@manuels said:

@ben.wes Oh, I think I completely missed your point ...

no worries. that was an interesting hint nonetheless!

disarm the switch after every crossing instead every switch

now i feel completely stupid, haha. of course that's the proper solution! there's no reason at all for not just resetting on every crossing!

i assume that i was too much influenced by a zero-crossing switcher abstraction i built in the past that required feedback in a similar case. thank you!

EDIT: and obviously, there's no need for the [sgn~] (sign) object. [>~ 0] is enough and i really hope that https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/2054 will make it into vanilla soon!