[PD] Looping samples with tabread4~

[Matteo Sisti Sette]

> For one-shot sampler phasor~ is not good IMO because of the
> quantiztion of the phase-inlet. phasor~ samplers would be terrible for
> drum-samplers.

Yeah, obviously "my" solution only makes sense if we want a continuous 
signal pitch.


>> (input pitch ~)
>> |
>> [rpole 1]
>> |
>> [tabread4~]
>>
>> (sending a [clear( to the rpole when starting playing)
>
>Puh, wouldn't [rpole~ 1] maybe be dangerous? Anyway I don't see any
>advantage in rpole~ over phasor~.

Why dangerous?

And yes, when looping there's no advantage of rpole over phasor. For the 
first cycle that only plays once however, or for the case of playing a 
sample with variable pitch but without loop, the advantage of rpole is IMHO 
simplicity: you don't have to scale the input and output depending on sample 
length as with phasor.


>Show us the code! ;)

Of course I will, as soon as I try it.


>This may work, but indeed would be very complicated. Also I assume,
>that changing the frequency of the phasor~ before you've reached the
>loop area would completely mess up the caluclations of phase and/or
>frequency of the second phasor~, especially as you can only set the
>phase of a phasor~ once every block.

Not totally sure until i try and code it, but I think the phase of the 
phasor(s) (and the scaling factors) only need to be set up at the very 
beginning, and changing the frequency at any moment won't mess up anything 
since the frequency feeds both phasors (or both the phasor and the rpole) at 
the same time.
However I may be missing something until I write down some formula.


Thanks,
m. 

 
 
 --
 Email.it, the professional e-mail, gratis per te: http://www.email.it/f
 
 Sponsor:
 Gioca on-line con Best Western! Puoi vincere buoni-sconto per soggiorni in tutto il mondo e un week-end per due persone a Positano. Iscriviti subito!
 Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=6498&d=17-5