• jameslo

    I'd like to use pp.fft-partconv~ on a long impulse response but I get the message "pp.fft-partconv-st~: IR length exceeds buffer". Do either of the creation arguments control the buffer length? Sorry for my laziness.

    edit: OMG I am so lazy, what is my problem? It took 30 mins to find the answer, here's how:

    • use text editor to search pp.fft-part*.* for the error message

    • find subpatch that prints the message

    • look at the condition that makes it print

    • trace backwards on some of the receives that could make the condition true, e.g. $0-nparts

    • notice that one factor in $0-nparts is $0-max-blocksize. Gee, that happens to resemble the name of one of the creation arguments.

    • try it. Bingo!

    posted in news read more
  • jameslo

    @dfkettle To complicate things further :) my friend has used VBAP (vector based amplitude panning) which I've never been able to understand fully. For mono signals panned into headphone mixes I've used Ambisonics in order to avoid having the sound in only one ear when panned to the extreme left or right, which sounds bad to me. IEM has a great VST Ambisonics library. But if you're worried about the relative computational cost of cos vs sqrt, you should run away from Ambisonics as fast as you can. :)

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @dfkettle This article describes the computation of the -4.5dB pan law: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/icm-online/readings/panlaws/

    edit: Oh I think it might describe -6dB too, which is just linear. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @dfkettle I always use cosines, but I think there might not be one right way given that many DAWs give you your choice of "pan law". This is the explanation that the Reaper manual links to: https://samplecraze.com/tutorials/the-pan-law/

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @jonasjohansson In your example, $1 refers to the first argument of the enclosing abstraction, not to any data that is passed to [oscformat]. If you want to change the OSC path on the fly, try using a set message like this:
    OSCexample.pd
    Screenshot 2022-09-05 105649.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @NegativeOne Yes, if your plug-in in named "niceEffect" then in addition to creating a Pd patch named "niceEffect.pd" you have to create a text configuration file named "niceEffect.txt" which tells Camomile what parameters your patch uses, how to connect input and output to it, whether it uses MIDI, whether it is an effect or an instrument plug-in, etc. It's all described in detail in the section "How to create new plugins".

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @NegativeOne I made two 64 bit windows vst3 plugins using Camomile/Pd and sent them to my friend to test in his environment (Ableton) and he said they worked. Both plugins used sidechains. That same friend says that Max for Live was included in his Ableton distribution. He's never used it though; coding is not his thing. Did you follow the step-by-step instructions on the Camomile wiki?

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @LucaB Oh I see, 2 things: you can connect the output of [line~] directly to [*~]. No need to go through snapshot. But if you want to use snapshot, you have to bang it regularly. Most people would use a metro set at 20 mS (or something).

    posted in patch~ read more
  • jameslo

    @LucaB It looks like you connected the release message [0 1000( to the right inlet of [line~]. It should go to the left inlet.

    posted in patch~ read more
  • jameslo

    If you follow the algorithm in http://cgm.cs.mcgill.ca/~godfried/publications/banff.pdf, E(5,13) = 1001010010100, But if you use the much simpler one from @Stutter you get 1001001010010. Yes, they are the same if you ignore rotation, but in normal musical practice nobody would say they are the same--they'd say one had flipped the beat (or something). Sometimes the algorithms agree; both algorithms output the same pattern for E(3,8).

    [1] Is there a base rotation for Euclidean rhythms?
    [2] For arbitrary E(k,n), what is the offset between these algorithms?

    posted in patch~ read more

Internal error.

Oops! Looks like something went wrong!