[PD] Audio line circuit breaker?
jancsika at yahoo.com
Tue Nov 15 22:29:23 CET 2011
----- Original Message -----
> From: IOhannes zmölnig <zmoelnig at iem.at>
> To: pd-list at iem.at
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 3:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [PD] Audio line circuit breaker?
> On 11/15/2011 09:06 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>> Oh, ok. Well, that's one of the three reasons that [sig~] exists.
> i think the only reason is legacy.
Not really. It has its applications when patching live (esp. in conjunction
with [expr~] as in that Youtube live-patching clip someone posted). And,
at least for me, in live patching it's the clearest choice for implicit summing
at a signal inlet when a control value needs to be combined with a signal
connection, and one has already made the signal connection. (But in a
premade patch I'd just make the summing explicit with [+~].)
Finally, if you have an object like [cyclone/rand~] where you can't set the
initial inlet value with an argument, it's easier to do [sig~ 30]--[rand~] than
It's certainly not the most vital object in Pd, but then again neither is
[float], really (why not just use [list])?
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
More information about the Pd-list