First I think it is of critically importance for people to remain extra-polite on big, international listservs.
I would suggest to make conscious effort to tone down any hostility, frustration, or anger you are feeling before posting. Take a deep breath.
Recall, we are all doing this to (mostly) to have fun :)
Next, I think this discussion could have great pedagogical value to intermediate PD patchers like me to explain what this is all about.
I'm sorry but I do not understand "overlapping sub-patches" or the issue with [vd~].
I would wager there are others here in my boat.
I very much would appreciate some more discussion here. Diagrams would help me very much.
Thanks!
PS: I am personally loving [vd~] at the moment. I just made an abstraction called "AutoPhase3". That and my "AutoPan3" makes a really awesome Leslie (rotating speaker) simulation.
Basically, it takes a mono source and writes it into a circular buffer.
Then, I have 3x [vd~]'s reading, with an LFO on the delay time. I can change the speed and depth of the LFO, as well as the phase-distance between them.
It's so freaking awesome! I then take these 3 signals and send them to discrete AutoPan modules. Again, speed and depth of LFO variable.
OMG, the fatness! Just take a simple saw oscillator, or even a sinusoid-- anything! And you can get lush flanger, phasor, and chorus effects.
I guess it's like FM so it can really warp the spectrum. Create artifacts not found in the original.
You can get it on GitHub. TinyURL.com / BHPDToolkit
FYI: There are several demo-patches with bugs in abstraction names. Everything is there in the repository, but some abstraction names changed. I will fix when I can.
On Thursday, September 24, 2015, Christof Ressi christof.ressi@gmx.at wrote:
cause I'm expecting the object to behave as it should
more precisely, you're expecting the object to behave as YOU THINK it
should ;-). But you're right that this discussion can go on forever. I just want to point out a last time that there's a difference between a bug and improper documentation. For example there's a technical reason why for computing audio in blocks, the reading onset for [vd~] would be less than the buffer size of [delwrite~] (especially when deliberately increasing the block size). This is totally logical and problems only arise because of vague terms like 'maximum delay time'. So it's not that the behaviour of [vd~] is wrong, but the helpfile - and that's an important difference!
Regarding the behaviour of overlapping subpatches you just have to accept
how Pd works. Changing its behaviour will break hundreds of patches.
To repeat myself, I personally think most of what you declare as a 'bug'
is just a matter of missing or misleading documentation.
Cheers
PS: I'm not claiming the last word on this subject
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. September 2015 um 18:54 Uhr Von: "Alexandre Torres Porres" porres@gmail.com An: "Christof Ressi" christof.ressi@gmx.at Cc: Pd-List pd-list@lists.iem.at Betreff: Re: Re: [PD] more delay weirdness 2015-09-24 9:53 GMT-03:00 Christof Ressi christof.ressi@gmx.at:
If my last post felt like a repression, I deeply regret that!
no worries ;) just had to bring it up.
but you were calling other things a bug, that were no bugs in a
technical sense (how ms are calculated in overlapping subpatches, how the maximum index for [vd~] is actual less than the buffer size, etc.).
(...) I'm personally rather careful with calling something a bug because
chances are high that there's simply a technical reason I didn't consider or couldn't understand.
Yeah, I see the way you think but I think quite differently and I still
consider these things a "bug". I know there might be technical issues that explain why things happen. But when nothing tells me that when using an overlapped block that I have to adjust time and frequency for objects, I see that as a bug, cause I'm expecting the object to behave as it should, and it just doesn't, and then my patches don't work and it sucks. I have to ask the list why the heck something is not happening and why do I need workarounds... someone had to look deeply in the code and sort it out...
Well, and instead of building workarounds in the patch, I know there's a
way to "fix" this in the object (just divide by the overlap number automatically in the code, seems easier than explaining it somewhere in the help file of a block~) - it wouldn't be impossible to fix it.
Regarding the maximum delay time. Well, help file says it can go up to
the total length and it doesn't... so... bug detected. I'm sure there's a reason why it's happening, but I don't think its impossible to fix it and make it happen as well.
but anyway, I get your view, but I'll just disagree :) not sure if we
should discuss and try to change each other's minds.
cheers