• jameslo

    I guess Steve Smith did not pass @whale-av's Turing test. Sad for him I suppose, assuming that sadness was one of the emotions he was programmed to feel. Moments before he was coldly erased, he sent me a PM, which I quote here for posterity:

    I've seen things you people wouldn't believe... Attack ships on fire 
    off the shoulder of Orion... I watched C-beams glitter in the dark 
    near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, 
    like tears in rain... 
    Time to die.
    

    posted in this forum read more
  • jameslo

    @jamcultur Weird. TBH I didn't build or test anything, I just had a hunch and looked at help files. If you can document a reliable procedure to reproduce that behavior you could file a bug report. Or you could just continue making music :)

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @jamcultur You get that error message because [poly]'s first outlet counts from 1 to 6, but clone numbers the cloned abstractions from 0 to 5. To make clone number from 1 to 6, use the -s flag, e.g. [clone -s 1 kbnote 6], or you could just subtract 1 from [poly]'s first outlet.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    I love this thread, and it became even more interesting about 5 hours ago :)

    posted in this forum read more
  • jameslo

    @nicnut especially since the freq is so low, it shouldn't matter. But I agree with you--if it sounds good then that's all that matters.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @nicnut [osc~] is equivalent to [phasor~]->[cos~] (and there's no way to mix my way with your way as far as I know), but you're enforcing sync on the positive zero crossing of the base freq oscillator, and my way syncs on 1 (i.e. the start of the cosine cycle). You can shift the phase of my scheme to be equivalent to yours by subtracting 0.25 from the base phasor, thereby making the output of the following cos~ a sine wave filtermodwrap.pd. To my ear, this sounds the same as yours.

    But in the title of your thread, you asked how to make all the oscillator's positive zero crossings line up with that of the base freq oscillator. If that's really what you want, then you should shift all the oscillator's phases (filtermodwrap.pd ),

    Edit: this used to be much more of a stream-of-consciousness mess, but I saw you hadn't logged on in a while so I took the liberty to revise what I wrote to make it clearer. Ha, and now I see we cross-posted, oh well.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @nicnut I think your solution is fine for low frequencies, but things get funny at higher ones (that aren't really very high at all in the scheme of things, e.g. 87hz). That's because threshold~ has to wait until the current audio block has been processed before it can sync your other 2 oscillators, hence the jump at the yellow arrow. The way I suggested doesn't have that issue.

    Screenshot 2024-05-16 140614.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @nicnut If the frequencies are integer multiples of a base frequency, then you can generate them using a phasor, a multiplier and wrap like this:
    Screenshot 2024-05-16 065512.png

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @PD-Pi Oh sorry, I didn't mean to digress, I honestly thought this was relevant to your original question.

    posted in technical issues read more
  • jameslo

    @manuels That's clever, thanks! I especially like how you get the slope of the input phasor (compensating for that downward jump every cycle) and how you construct the output phasor. But I think there are two issues with it. Firstly, a sync will reset the phase of the output phasor at an arbitrary point unless the output phasor frequency is an exact multiple of the input frequency. Secondly, without sync, I think the output phasor may drift WRT the input phasor due to floating point roundoff error. Agree?

    Backing out to look at the big picture again, i.e. Brendan's question, this means that it couldn't be used to make either a "hardsync" synthesizer (disclaimer: I don't really know what that is) or a "phasor~-synchronized system", assuming that both require a precise phase relationship between the input and output phasors and that the output phasor doesn't contain discontinuities. What do you think?

    posted in technical issues read more

Internal error.

Oops! Looks like something went wrong!