[PD] Question about object categorizing

Mathieu Bouchard matju at artengine.ca
Sat Sep 26 18:18:45 CEST 2009

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, PSPunch wrote:

> Perhaps I should have made clear that I was not sure how [print~] and 
> [samphold~] would even be considered to go under filters.

No, no, you were clear enough, I just meant that those aren't the only 
things that don't fit where they've been put, and that the problem is much 
bigger than that. (e.g. afaik, in Signal Theory, [rpole~] is not a 
"filter", though it still is peripherally related to filters; otoh there 
might be other Signal Theorists using different definitions or namings).

> Is [samphold~] also often used in building filters?

I don't know... but it isn't "filtering" because what you can get out of 
it can have a richer spectrum than the original (left-inlet input), and it 
isn't "linear" either, or "quad", or whatever... it doesn't fit the filter 
theory much... and I don't see how using it anywhere inside an abstraction 
can not prevent the abstraction to be a linear filter or quad filter...!

According to my num.analysis book, [samphold~] would be called a 
"piecewise-constant interpolator", with the warning that "constant 
interpolator" is somewhat a contradiction of terms; and that you get to 
choose the pieces (using right-inlet). Whereas [adc~], for example, is 
also a piecewise-constant interpolator (in hardware or emulated), but all 
the pieces are identical in "width" (duration), that is, 1 sample.

  _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ...
| Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801

More information about the Pd-list mailing list