If I understood right then this should work.
midinotechecker.pd

I remember how confusing it is when you start PD.
I can almost understand what you mean but not quite. Why don't you upload what you have?

I am getting:
You want to end up with a subpatch with two outputs.
One of them sends a bang when vel=0 , note = x and channel = y
The other sends a bang when vel = 100, note = x and channel = y
Otherwise never send a bang.
x = a specific note number you want to test for & y = a specific MIDI channel you want to test for.

Is that what you mean?

Thanks for the reply but I don't think biquad~ can accept signal rate inputs, only message rate. Or am I missing something?

Why don't you just take the first and last values and draw a line between them?
Or sample a few more values if you want to approximate the original data a bit more?

I am really enjoying some of the filter abstractions I have found here, but they are quite CPU intensive so I am looking for good externals. So far the ones that sound good only accept message rate signals to their control inputs. Please recommend filter externals with signal rate inputs, at least for cutoff. Preferably LP/HP/BP/Notch and EQs would be nice too. Thank you all!

...but something like a Kurzweil K2000 has plenty of aliasing and seems like a pretty naive implementation of oscillators and filters but mostly sounds great, at least in the lower octaves.

Hi. Your filter looks interesting. I have an Xpander here, the filter is probably not as exciting as you would imagine But still a nice synth...... anyway, on topic: I just wondered, I mean I have digital synths that sound good, from the Yamaha DX era up to modern softsynths. I just wonder what is going on under the hood besides the main stuff. I think my problems are mostly caused by aliasing but I can't really oversample much because I'm running out of CPU. Perhaps I'll reduce polyphony to 6 notes and try some different techniques for bandlimited oscillators.

Yeah, funny that they keep putting off fixing it, it seems quite an easy thing to repair. Who wants backwards compatibility to something that's broken?

This is interesting. But surely a [hip~ 5] ought to enough to remove a DC offset. I don't understand how DC offset would cause oscillators to drift apart...???

I want to use this filter because it sounds good and has much less CPU overhead that making filters with biquad~ / czero~ etc. But the cutoff & resonance inputs are via a [pack]ed set of floats. What's the best way to use this if I want to modulate the filter with LFOs or envelopes that are at signal rate? Just use [snapshot~] and a fast [metro] and perhaps a [line] to smooth it out? Or should I find a better filter external?