Sorry,
forgot ta add [change -1] after the [i].
I thought this was meant to be used with a MIDI signal - maybe I got that wrong?
Ingo
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: pd-list-bounces@iem.at [mailto:pd-list-bounces@iem.at] Im Auftrag von Roman Haefeli Gesendet: Montag, 24. Februar 2014 10:34 An: pd-list@iem.at Betreff: Re: [PD] smooth random numbers
On Sun, 2014-02-23 at 04:20 +0100, Ingo wrote:
Starting from Roman's patch I would probably do it like the attached
patch.
Many ways might solve a certain problem and in Pd those many ways can often be divided into a "subtractive" approach - more than necessary is generated and the overhead is filtered out afterwards - and an "additive" approach - exactly the data needed is generated.
I believe you totally missed the point why I chose the latter here. Using a constant time grain for [line] generates too much data for slow ramps, leading to many duplicates. Attach a print to our patch and you'll see. At the same time it misses some integer numbers for fast ramps. Also, by having a fixed time grain the result looks like a resampled ramp (which it basically is), which means it is jittery and doesn't emulate a steady movement of the fader.
Roman
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list