[PD] a full-featured sampleplayer

Atte André Jensen atte.jensen at gmail.com
Thu Aug 7 23:41:31 CEST 2008

Roman Haefeli wrote:

Thanks for your input!

> i think there is tons of such abstractions around. anyway, i like to
> re-implement it again and again everytime i need it, because there is
> always little things that i would like to have different from the
> current implementation and also it is always a good exercise (and
> probably i do better this time than last time).

Hmm, I get your point. I had hope to do the sample_player to end all 
sample_players (and then make some music with it) :-)

> i wouldn't make your abstraction [phasor~] based, because of the problem
> you already sketched out: if you change the rate during the playback,
> you don't know when it is finished. that is why i propose to make any
> table based sampleplayer based on [vline~]. since you need to calculate
> the start-, endpoint and duration, you know at any time, where the index
> currently is (by calculating the current position from [timer] output
> and the three values i mentioned above). this way you can change the
> rate at any time you want,

I don't understand. Below you state "that you cannot continuously change 
the playback speed", what's the difference?

> you just need to recalculate start, end and
> duration for [vline~]. it looks more complicated at the beginning, but
> it is the cleanest solution i can think of.
> there is one disadvantage of the [vline~]-approach compared to the
> [phasor~]: you cannot continuously change the playback speed. so it is
> yours to decide, which way to go.

I just know, one day, I'm gonna want to touch that pitch bender of 
modulate that playback rate...

peace, love & harmony

http://atte.dk       | http://myspace.com/attejensen
http://anagrammer.dk | http://modlys.dk

More information about the Pd-list mailing list