[PD] bendin bug (?)

Alexandre Torres Porres porres at gmail.com
Sun Sep 11 23:39:55 CEST 2016


But in pd it is 14-bits already

It's just that both counterparts are not in the same standard, a bug as i
see it (bendout is -8192 to 8191 & bendin is 0 to 16383) - bendout is what
I consider the usual way to deal with pitch bend, where 0 is no
bend up/down.

cheers

2016-09-11 8:15 GMT-03:00 Derek Kwan <derek.x.kwan at gmail.com>:

>
> Hello,
>
> Well, that's basically what Max does. It defaults to the original 0-127
> and then you can specify a "hires" mode to use all 14-bits rather than
> just 8-bits like 0-127 did. We just implemented this for midiparse and
> midiformat in cyclone, the current version only had the 0-127. So yes,
> it'd be pretty easy to do. Just default to the 0-127 and have a flag or
> have a message change the mode to the "hires" mode. I think in terms of
> a software's life cycle, if you want it to keep getting better and
> better, something along the line has to break at some point when people
> figure out better and more efficient ways of implementing things. Look
> at Python 2 vs 3 or Lua. But I suppose that argument is for a different
> time and a different thread and you wouldn't necessarily have to break
> things here anyways =).
>
> Derek
>
>
> On Sep 04, William Huston wrote:
> > I agree with Alexandre about what seems sensible, but introducing a
> change
> > like this will break existing patches.
> >
> > Is it possible (for all changes like this) to introduce a compatibility
> > mode to get the old behavior?
> >
> > Yes, any seasoned Pd hacker will know how to fix the scaling. I'm just
> > imagining someone's patch breaks after upgrading and they just want a
> fast
> > way to get old behavior.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > On Sunday, September 4, 2016, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> > --
> > May you, and all beings
> > be happy and free from suffering :)
> > -- ancient Buddhist Prayer (Metta)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/
> listinfo/pd-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20160911/b9441c48/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list