[PD] bendin bug (?)

[Simon Iten]

afaik they were always 14-bit but many cheap controllers only use 7-bit
resolution...

not sure why max would only allow 0-127, maybe you can get float values
from it ? :)

Am Montag, 5. September 2016 schrieb Alexandre Torres Porres :

> As long as we're on it, I wonder if the pitch bend messages were always
> 14bit, cause in max, the bendin object is only 127 (a heritage from mid
> 80s?)
>
> cheers
>
> 2016-09-04 17:44 GMT-03:00 Simon Iten <itensimon at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','itensimon at gmail.com');>>:
>
>> well for me a 14-bit number with a range of 16383 is zero based,
>> otherwise I would need an additional bit for the sign.
>>
>> also nobend=2000H indicates  a value from 0 to 16383...
>>
>>
>>
>> Am Sonntag, 4. September 2016 schrieb Giulio Moro via Pd-list :
>>
>>> The specs don't say much about how to interpret the value actually
>>> https://www.midi.org/specifications/item/table-1-summary-of-midi-message
>>>
>>> "Pitch Bend Change.
>>> status: 1110nnnn
>>> data: 0lllllll 0mmmmmmm
>>>
>>> This message is sent to indicate a change in the pitch bender (wheel or
>>> lever, typically). The pitch bender is measured by a fourteen bit value.
>>> Center (no pitch change) is 2000H. Sensitivity is a function of the
>>> transmitter. (llllll) are the least significant 7 bits. (mmmmmm) are the
>>> most significant 7 bits."
>>>
>>>
>>> >________________________________
>>> > From: Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>
>>> >To: Giulio Moro <giuliomoro at yahoo.it>
>>> >Cc: "pd-list at lists.iem.at" <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
>>> >Sent: Sunday, 4 September 2016, 19:33
>>> >Subject: Re: [PD] bendin bug (?)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >2016-09-04 13:35 GMT-03:00 Giulio Moro <giuliomoro at yahoo.it>:
>>> >
>>> >Is this a [bendin] or a [bendout]  bug?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>[bendin]'s current implementation is closer to the actual MIDI
>>> messages being transmitted.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >but in actuality, the not raw standard is from -8192 to 8191 right?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I just care they both are the same, but it seems to me that -8192 to
>>> 8191 is the sensible choice
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >cheers
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/li
>>> stinfo/pd-list
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160906/580e2839/attachment.html>