[PD] [env~] issues
Alexandre Torres Porres
porres at gmail.com
Tue Dec 16 16:04:42 CET 2014
> seems similar to the one used to make delay line
> shorter than one block.
and how is that trick? :)
2014-12-16 11:41 GMT-02:00 IOhannes m zmölnig <zmoelnig at iem.at>:
> On 12/15/2014 11:53 PM, Raphaël Ilias wrote:
> > Ok, I get the trick, it seems similar to the one used to make delay line
> > shorter than one block.
> > However, I still feel that an object "give-me-RMS enveloppe-on-bang" (for
> > the last N samples or blocks) would appear to me an easier way to handle
> > this case.
> > If it doesn't exist, I'll try to build something like this... one day !
> > Many thanks !
> oh, but that is just trivial:
> messages and signals are always calculated one after each other (first
> all messages; once they are done, signals are processed).
> so an even easier way would be to use a latch ([f]) and [bang~]+[del 0]
> to do the calculation in msg-domain.
> [bang~] will output a bang before each signal block (or after; it really
> will trigger a bang before the *next* signal block).
> unfortunately, this bang can happen before or after the events sent out
> by [env~], so we need to make sure to get an event *after* all [env~]s
> have triggered.
> the simplest way to achieve this is by using an additional [delay 0],
> which will schedule an event at the same logical time NOW but after all
> events already scheduled for NOW (e.g. those from [env~]).
> see attached patch. (in the attached patch i wasn't able to trigger an
> undesired behaviour without the [delay 0]; however i haven't tried hard
> and i'm pretty sure that you *can*; thus you should use [del 0])
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list