Pd-list March 2010

pd-list@lists.iem.at

152 participants
270 discussions

isosonic curves : level the perceptual loudness of different pitches
by Mathieu Bouchard 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

> In Fact, I just compiled 2 ways of doing the phons curves, by > Robinson-Dadson, and the ISO226:2003. glad to see it's released and GPL'ed, but can you just add « with lots of help from Mathieu Bouchard » somewhere in the comments ? _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801

2 1

Reproducing the THX deep note in Pd
by Jonathan Wilkes 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

Reading the whole discussion about "smooth" sounds made me think of this exercise: http://www.batuhanbozkurt.com/instruction/recreating-the-thx-deep-note Any Pd peeps interested in trying to reproduce the THX sound? I'd really be interested in comparing the result to the original, as well as the pd patch to the supercollider code. -Jonathan

3 4

any mac OS terminal experts?
by Mathieu Bouchard 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

require "socket" f = TCPSocket.new "localhost",4242 f.puts "hello world;" you don't need pdsend and pdreceive. if you have Floats and Symbols in an Array you can simply do : f.puts myArray.join(" ") + ";" and similarly Integers and Strings can be passed off in the same way, and you'll get the same bugs that [netsend] and pdsend have when symbols have spaces or symbols look like floats or symbols contain commas, semicolons, etc. but the good news is that you don't need any external programmes and it's fully crossplatform without having to worry about paths at all. _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801

1 0

Re: [PD] mp3cast~ on ubuntu 9.10 crash pd
by Mathieu Bouchard 26 Mar '10

26 Mar '10

in the end, this possibly triple bug report belongs more on pd-list than in private mails. On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > >> il y a trop de sprintf dans mp3cast_connect pour qu'on puisse facilement >> identifier lequel. > > actually, not so bad : > > resp is 32 bytes > > sprintf(resp, "%d", x->x_bitrate) is maximum 12 bytes because %d > outputs at most 11 bytes and then there's one end-of-string byte. > this is fine. this sprintf occurs twice. > > sprintf(resp, "source:%s", x->x_passwd); implies that x->x_passwd has to > be not more than 24 bytes long (plus terminator). > > sprintf(resp, "Authorization: Basic %s\r\n", base64); is 24 bytes plus > strlen(base64). thus base64 is a string that shouldn't be longer than 8 > bytes (plus terminator). mp3cast_base64_encode produces that string. > > sprintf(resp, "\r\nice-audio-info: bitrate=%d", x->x_bitrate) is 27 > bytes plus the bitrate. Thus if x_bitrate is any value higher than 99999 > or lower than -9999, you have a bug. > > that's already all. > > _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... > | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801 _ _ __ ___ _____ ________ _____________ _____________________ ... | Mathieu Bouchard, Montréal, Québec. téléphone: +1.514.383.3801

1 0

Recording Audio in Table to File
by Ben Baker-Smith 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Hello, I'm recording audio into tables, but I want to have the option of saving the audio in a given table to a .wav file. Can this be done without playing the audio out of the table into a readsf~ object in realtime? Thanks, -Ben

1 1

Re: [PD] Max Smoother Audio than Pd?
by Alexandre Porres 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

>* I'd like to hear something composed by a king of pd patches, for the fun.* have fun http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA4PbPKZuwk Oh, by the way, as I said, usually, programmers work in partnership with composers, as the case above. Both worked together in the 80's at IRCAM (with max) and still do now in San Diego (with Pd). >* I've no clue about how max instrument patches sounds*... >* no way to make something smooth enough to be commercial*>* unless knowing by heart all the dsp tricks* That's the "what you get is what you did" rule I said before. but more than that, people don't go for this kind of thing if their interest is mostly synthesis. There are tons of synthesizers in the world, made by people who know all the DSP tricks (engeneers in fact). The cool thing about programng is that you can create new interactive stuff, controllers, tell me machine when to react and what to do if this and that... all in realtime, and then use it to control even a hardware synthesizer. Here's an example, there are tons of Phase Vocoders, several plug ins, but none work in realtime. But actually, pd comes with a Phase Vocoder that was just about ready to be used live in realtime. So I tweaked it, I've been told these patces of mine look like ableton live... they use nothing but objects from Pd-Vanilla. Phase Vocoding Abstractions: [PVoc.pd] & [LPVoc.pd]<http://sites.google.com/site/porres/PhaseVoc.zip?attredirects=0> And I'm far from considering myself a "pd king", this is basic stuff for me... cheers

1 0

Re: [PD] any mac OS terminal experts?
by Andrew Turley 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

So first off, you don't need to call them with 'open' from the command line. You can just run them directly like any other command, like this: echo "a b c 1 2 3;" | /Applications/Pd-extended.app/Contents/Resources/bin/pdsend 3939 The command reads the standard input and sends the data to PD. Assuming you have a PD patch running with a netrecieve object listening to port 3939, you can send the same message as above with this Ruby code: require 'socket' hostname = "localhost" port = 3939 s = TCPSocket.open(hostname, port) # don't forget the semicolon! s.puts("a b c 1 2 3;") s.close() andy On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Faraday <jbturgid(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > I mean both opening them in finder and using 'open pdsend' in the terminal, > same result. I'm not up to socket programming in Ruby. But knowing that it's > possible to communicate directly is a good start. Now, how do it do it? > >> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:13:12 -0700 >> Subject: Re: [PD] any mac OS terminal experts? >> From: aturley(a)acm.org >> To: jbturgid(a)hotmail.com >> CC: pd-list(a)iem.at >> >> You should be able to run them from the command line. When you say >> that you are "opening the files", do you mean you're clicking on them >> in the Finder? As you've said, that will just open up a terminal >> window. >> >> Also, these commands just communicate with strings over a TCP socket. >> If you're comfortable with socket programming in Ruby then you don't >> even have to use pdsend and pdreceive. >> >> andy >> >> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Andrew Faraday <jbturgid(a)hotmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hey All >> > I've recently started learning Ruby (on Ubuntu 9.04), part of what I'm >> > trying to do is control PD through ruby, using the terminal. >> > The main trouble I'm having now is that I'm mostly using a Mac OS X >> > machine >> > which doesn't recognize the 'pdsend' and 'pdreceive' commands (as the >> > linux >> > shell does). I've tried opening the files with these names in >> > /resources/bin >> > which open a new terminal window and display what looks like the >> > relevant >> > -help text. But I can't seem to use these to send messages to and from >> > pd >> > from the Mac OS terminal. (in theory I could then automate this with >> > Ruby). >> > Any ideas, at all? >> > ________________________________ >> > Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pd-list(a)iem.at mailing list >> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> > >> > > > ________________________________ > Not got a Hotmail account? Sign-up now - Free

2 3

GEM: forcing the use of Quicktime with pix_flim??
by Matteo Sisti Sette 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

Hi, With the latest release of Gem pix_film eats about ten or twenty time more CPU than a precompiled binary compiled in August 2006 that I downloaded time ago. And it eats so much cpu after opening a file no matter whether it is playing it or not (I mean even after disconnecting the gemhead from it). That didn't happen in the 2006 version So I've realised that with the 2006 version of gem, it uses QUICKTIME, while when I use the latest version it uses DIRECTSHOW. Digging into the patch (which I wrote a couple of years ago for the 2006 version) I notice I opened files with a message like this: [open myfile.mov 1( That "1" is undocumented in the current help patches, but iirc I used it in order to force [pix_film] to use quicktime rather than directshow. Was that feature removed? If so, is there another way to force gem to use quicktime rather directshow? I'd like to test with quicktime to figure out whether this absurdly huge cpu consumption is due to the use of DirectShow as opposed to Quicktime, or if it is just a bug introduced in some recent version of Gem. thanks m. -- Matteo Sisti Sette matteosistisette(a)gmail.com http://www.matteosistisette.com

3 7

Re: [PD] Pd-list Digest, Vol 60, Issue 101
by Alexandre Porres 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

> I'd like to hear something composed by a king of pd patches, for the fun. have fun http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA4PbPKZuwk Oh, by the way, as I said, usually, programmers work in partnership with composers, as the case above. Both worked together in the 80's at IRCAM (with max) and still do now in San Diego (with Pd). > I've no clue about how max instrument patches sounds ... > no way to make something smooth enough to be commercial > unless knowing by heart all the dsp tricks That's the "what you get is what you did" rule I said before. but more than that, people don't go for this kind of thing if their interest is mostly synthesis. There are tons of synthesizers in the world, made by people who know all the DSP tricks (engeneers in fact). The cool thing about programng is that you can create new interactive stuff, controllers, tell me machine when to react and what to do if this and that... all in realtime, and then use it to control even a hardware synthesizer. Here's an example, there are tons of Phase Vocoders, several plug ins, but none work in realtime. But actually, pd comes with a Phase Vocoder that was just about ready to be used live in realtime. So I tweaked it, I've been told these patces of mine look like ableton live... they use nothing but objects from Pd-Vanilla. Phase Vocoding Abstractions: [PVoc.pd] & [LPVoc.pd]<http://sites.google.com/site/porres/PhaseVoc.zip?attredirects=0> And I'm far from considering myself a "pd king", this is basic stuff for me... cheers Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 19:36:54 +0100 (CET) > From: colet.patrice(a)free.fr > hello, > > In fact I've no clue about how max instrument patches sounds, only using > it for livelooping, but I and other musicians like me didn't like the > sonority of netpd for example, because rendered texture are poor, only one > sytnh sound good (I don't remember which one), and once we've turned around > all sonorities of this synth, there's not much things to play with. > I'm not blaming the great work of roman on netpd, but just demonstrate > that in despite a lot of efforts to have tools for making music with pd, > there's no way to make something smooth enough to be commercial, unless > cheating with some steinberg or direct x stuff, of knowing by heart all the > dsp tricks. Anyway, I'd like to hear something composed by a king of pd > patches, for the fun. >

1 0

Re: [PD] Max Smoother Audio than Pd?
by Matteo Sisti Sette 25 Mar '10

25 Mar '10

> So, I think this is an important myth to get over... Well that seems a kinda "biased" approach :) Whenever anybody says that "Max sounds smoother than Pd" (or viceversa of course) we should force him to answer these three questions: 1) define "smoother", what the hell does it mean (is it less clicks/pops? is it less dropouts? or what else?) 2) are you comparing with the same hardware? 3) Let me see the patches (ok this is not a question - this is a demand, lol) If he/she cannot provide these data, we should force him/her to apologize for what s/he said - not because it is false but because it doesn't mean anything :) We could speculate a lot about why a person may think Max sound smoother than Pd and be wrong, or about why Max may actually sound smoother than Pd and "be wrong" (e.g. what-you-get-is-not-just-what-you-did), OR why Max may actually and surprisingly sound smoother than Pd "for a good reason" (do we really know every detail to the last bit of any given sample of a sinusoid?)... But that would be only speculation until we know what we are talking about. -- Matteo Sisti Sette matteosistisette(a)gmail.com http://www.matteosistisette.com

2 1

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
27
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

Pd-list March 2010