[PD] Conflict between radcrusher/bitcrusher and writesf~
ronni.montoya at gmail.com
Thu Nov 20 16:18:13 CET 2014
Hi Chris , you mean using samphold~ and wrap~ instead of the
How can i use those objects for bitcrushing?
I attached this patch so you can see the problem.
2014-11-19 19:24 GMT-08:00, Chris McCormick <chris at mccormick.cx>:
> Hi Ronni,
> On 20/11/14 04:31, Ronni Montoya wrote:
>> Any idea why is this? how can i solve this problem?
> My guess is something to do with changing blocksize using block~. Would
> help if you posted the abstractions.
> You can accomplish both bitcrushing and downsampling without affecting
> the actual blocksize Pd is running at by using samphold~ and wrap~.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 2342 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Pd-list