Sat Jun 4 12:54:28 CEST 2011

```
[vline~] is versatile :) It can be used to solve many problems
with envelopes. Also, don't be scared to use two vlines if
it makes the problem easier to understand, their good time accuracy
ensures they will do what you expect most times.

On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 01:22:34 +0200
Stephan Elliot Perez <dreamoftheshoreofanotherworld at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for your response.  I tried to apply the branching principal using
> the equation from the [exact-ead~] by having the envelope go to 1 and then
> to 2 instead of 0, using min 1 and max 1 to create a branch, using an
> expression to convert the ascending numbers over 1 into descending numbers
> under 1, and then jumping to 0.  I think the problem is that, during the
> switches, two 1s are sent at the same time, leading to a 2 (as seen in the
> graph), where I actually need a 0...
>
> -Stephan
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Andy Farnell <padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > You might be able to easily get that behaviour by
> > quickly editing the example I gave you.
> >
> > The maths is really geometry.
> >
> > There are a few things that can be done as time domain
> > transforms when thinking about envelopes and suchlike
> > in this way.
> >
> > 1) Flip it around zero with [*~ -1]
> > 2) Invert arithmetically wrt 1.0 using [sig~ 1][-~]
> > 3) Get the [min~] or the [max~] wrt another value
> > 4) Clamp at a value using [clip~] ... is special case of (3)
> > 5) Shift by an amount using [-~] or [+~]
> > 6) Scale by some factor with [*~]
> >
> > IIRC the idiom for a two stage envelope like that is
> > to use [min~]/[max~] to create a split point and treat
> > each of the two branches differently (you can do piecewise
> > waveform construction the same way).
> >
> > If you want time symmetry then have the [vline~] go to 1.0
> > and back to [0.0] and just use one of the branches.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 30 May 2011 18:45:55 +0200
> > Stephan Elliot Perez <dreamoftheshoreofanotherworld at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Greetings,
> > >      Thank you for your responses.  I tried your suggestion, hardoff, and
> > > the result is the attached [ead-reverse~].  Unfortunately, the expression
> > > behaves differently with this [vline~]-construction as with the
> > [phasor~].
> > > Here, if 1 is entered into the right input of [expr~], the result is an
> > > envelope whose steepness becomes exponentially smaller while ascending
> > and
> > > exponentially greater while descending (if near 0, the opposite form is
> > > produced and values between 1 and 0 produce a divided, confused form). I
> > > however wish to produce an envelope that becomes exponentially steeper
> > both
> > > ascending and descending.
> > >      My problem with this [expr~] as well as with Mr. Farnell's patches
> > is
> > > that I do not quite understand the math behind them.  Any ideas?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Stephan Elliot Perez
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 5:54 PM, hard off <hard.off at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > instead of the [phaser~], send a [line~] (or [vline~]) signal.
> > > >
> > > > for example:
> > > >
> > > > [1, 0.5 500, 0 1000 500(
> > > > |
> > > > [vline~]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > like most of my patches, i don't think i originally made that one,
> > someone
> > > > else posted it, and i just copied.   ;)
> > > > must have been a long time ago though, cos i barely remember it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Stephan Elliot Perez <
> > > > dreamoftheshoreofanotherworld at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Greetings,
> > > >>        I wish to produce a wave form with the opposite form of the
> > normal
> > > >> ead~ wave (the curves become exponentially steeper instead of
> > flatter),
> > > >> which I can achieve by entering a negative number into the phasor in
> > hard
> > I
> > > >> still want to be able to independently change the length of the
> > ascent,
> > > >> decline, and distance between waves as is possible with ead~.  Does
> > anyone
> > > >> know how I could do this, or possibly have access to an
> > abstraction-version
> > > >> of ead~?
> > > >>
> > > >> Best regards,
> > > >> Stephan
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > > >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > > >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Andy Farnell <padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >

--