ok, one more thing...
The 1st is just a very basic implementation : it's not possible to define
a non-linear link for example. The 2nd one solve them in a very simple scenario : 1 mass and 1 spring. So it's not possible to create other network.
So Spring from SuperCollider is just a very simplified model, and according to people in the SuperCollider forum it's not really different than a 2nd order filter like Ringz or resonant~ from ELSE, right?
So I'm failing to see where SuperCollider's Spring shines. I already ported it to a compiled Pd object, and I also ported the MAX code but I can't see why I should bother including them or what would be special about them. I like the Ball object from SC and that seems like something fun to have...
But then, I think I mentioned this before, I came across Spring in SC here on this code on Scanned Synthesis https://sccode.org/1-4Rm it's just a chain of Spring objects connected in a series, with a feedback loop, so it's circular. The output of each spring is an audio channel output and an object crossfades between the channels and "scans" it.
So now I wonder if Spring is indispensable in this patch, and if one can just use some other 2nd order filter instead. I am also presuming that there might be some technical details where the sheer simplicity of this setup misses some important factors that you are covering in your scannd synthesis implementations with pmpd, huh?
Cheers
thanks for clarifying
But if you just want to play with meaningful parameter without understanding the physics, then pmpd is not for you.
This is what I realize, and I would also like to have some higher level ready made and easy to use toys for simple tasks.
there are lot's of software dedicated to MSS, the equations are all about the same. But physical modelling is broader than MSS.
sure, I see
Thanks for the references and answers.