• cfry

    Thank you all, this will come handy. Then I will replace my awkward improvisation ->
    listprocess.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    Hi Forum,

    I would like to multiply all elements in a list and make a new list of the result.

    Is there a way to do this by manipulating the list directly?

    Thanks!

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    @seb-harmonik.ar said:

    @cfry the quality mainly refers to how steep they are. The basic filters are just 1-zero 1-pole, simple recursive digital filters.

    Thanks, then I can relax on this.

    but like I said it's unlikely that's an issue here..

    Yes, sorry I posted such a messy patch.

    But the general approach I use, vanilla filters in series to create a x-over for 5 speakers and a sub, is this a good idea? Or would you do it differently? Any idea on how steep the filters should be, and how much they should overlap? Just to learn a bit.

    The actual speakers are basically scrap parts, so it will never be hifi, but that is another story.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    @alexandros said

    ...adding five signals is very likely to create a sum that exceeds the digital audio range (-1 to 1), which will be clipped, even if you don't use `[clip~ -1 1]

    This surprise me! I though signals in pd basically had infinite headroom until it arrived at something that can not handle it. Or so it seems. And there is a huge difference in levels if you omit [clip~] even if it is set to -1 1. I use it ti protect ears, speakers, and sensitive ppl.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    @alexandros said:

    There's no difference between using [+~ ] and just inserting signals to one inlet. The signals are added in the code of each object anyway

    Cool, thanks.

    But what about creating 2,3,4 etc pole filters by series like i have done?

    And pd documentation mention the quality of the vanilla filters, compared to "more expensive" (cpu). What is this about? Simply that they will not color the sound, or will they leave unvanted artifacts?

    Sorry about the patch screenshot, it is a mess.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    Hi,

    in general I follow the path of "if it sounds good, it is good", but I wonder how...

    Pds [lop~] and [hip~] affects the signal overall quality. Depending on what I feed through them, I kind of feel the the sound is affected negatively at times.

    I can not hear any difference from summing the signal with [+~] or just attaching then to the same inlet~ of where they are going. What negative effect is supposed to happen when you not sum with [+~]?

    I need a simple x-over to send 5 channels and 1 sub and did this thingie. Does not sound that great. I think.

    xover.png

    The pre clip gain of course has to be adjusted for what is coming in. But I also like the sound of [clip~]. (And never mind the odd routing to dac~)

    Thanks for input!

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    Hi,

    Has anyone had convolve~ running on a raspberry pi 3? You need to install FFTW 3.3.5. http://www.fftw.org.

    Cheers

    posted in technical issues read more
  • cfry

    @alexandros Thank you, I have been using (and still do) your abstractions extensively and it is great.

    However, I just want to understand Open Sound Control and how I could use it. My idea was that I could use it sort of a hub between several local applications, and all I would have to do was edit the OSC address to change route.

    posted in I/O hardware diyread more
  • cfry

    I had an idea that it would be good to have the flexibility to go any route, even not through Pd. Don't know if it is a good idea.

    posted in I/O hardware diyread more

Internal error.

Oops! Looks like something went wrong!