[PD] Does Pd have a "sound"?

[Alexandre Torres Porres]

> OK, I had to adjust the Pd patch a little to get it to match the SC3 code.

why? what do you mean? was it wrong?

2016-02-16 6:07 GMT-02:00 Matt Barber <brbrofsvl at gmail.com>:

> OK, I had to adjust the Pd patch a little to get it to match the SC3 code.
> I've made an A/B test: one is SC3 and the other is the matching Pd patch.
> See if you can tell which one is which, and why you answered the way you
> did. I went fast and made them 44.1kHz 16-bit; you'll have to live with it.
> :)
>
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <
> porres at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> correct code
>>
>> {VarSaw.ar(LFPulse.kr(1, 0, 0.3, 50, 50), 0, LFTri.ar(1, 0, 0.5,
>> 0.5))!2}.play
>>
>> 2016-02-16 2:54 GMT-02:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> well, while we're at it, here's the patches for you to check and
>>> speculate :)
>>>
>>>
>>> SuperCollider Code;
>>> VarSaw.ar(LFPulse.kr(1, 0, 0.3, 50, 50), 0, LFTri.ar(1, 0, 0.5,
>>> 0.5))!2.play
>>>
>>> 2016-02-16 2:45 GMT-02:00 Matt Barber <brbrofsvl at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> If there is difference between the sound of [triangle~] and VarSaw, it
>>>> might actually be in the way phase is generated. The algorithms themselves
>>>> are pretty much the same, but while VarSaw makes its own single-precision
>>>> phase by simply subtracting 1 when an increment takes it past 1.0 (using a
>>>> conditional on each sample), [triangle~] is a waveshaper that is fed phase.
>>>> Pd's phasor is a little idiosyncratic, using a kind of bit-hacking to
>>>> unwrap phase (the Höldrich method), which is supposed to perform a bit
>>>> faster than a conditional, and it's inside not just [phasor~] but all the
>>>> oscillator objects. If I remember correctly it can be prone to phase drift
>>>> over time, but don't quote me on that.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres <
>>>> porres at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I still believe differences between Pd and SC depend on other
>>>>> technical details than the ones presented, because similar objects like
>>>>> triangle~ and VarSaw will just sound quite differently, hence it may rely
>>>>> on subtleties inside the objects themselves. And I'm not talking about the
>>>>> "cultural" use which is something I believe makes quite a difference even
>>>>> in the Pd x Max world (when they both sound quite similar).
>>>>>
>>>>> cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> 2016-02-15 13:54 GMT-02:00 Andy Farnell <padawan12 at obiwannabe.co.uk>:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Good list of technical peculiarities Claude. For me, the "sound" is
>>>>>> those
>>>>>> quirks combined with how Chris describes a "cultural" or "contextual"
>>>>>> use.
>>>>>> I used to be great at knowing the sound of software or hardware
>>>>>> sources
>>>>>> and could spot Reaktor, or a Roland analogue in moments. But
>>>>>> emulations
>>>>>> got better and my ears got older, and maybe I began to care less about
>>>>>> implementation and more about artistic intent. As Chris says,
>>>>>> different tools tend to make you think and work in certain patterns,
>>>>>> and I think it is this more than anything that constitutes a "sound".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> cheers
>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>>>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>>>>> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160216/159fc2c0/attachment.html>