> would be great if it worked. (i've tried similar tricks...)

yeah, don't know what happened, when I tried with count~ it seemed to work, for my own surprise, I wasn;t expecting it to work either. Now I have no idea what happened.

I may have also just gone insane for good :)

2016-02-25 14:52 GMT-03:00 martin brinkmann <mnb@martin-brinkmann.de>:

On 25/02/16 18:09, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> 2016-02-25 13:57 GMT-03:00 martin brinkmann <mnb@martin-brinkmann.de>:
>
>> if you want feedback in a complex patch,
>> (like these virtual-virtual-modular-systems) the only thing
>> you can do is to reblock everything to 1, which is not always possible
>> (due to high cpu load, conflicting blocksizes, whatever).
>>
>
> This was addressed only to me, let me reply to the list.

sorry, i pressed the wrong reply button.

> I never needed to do it in a super complex patch, but anyway, what you're
> saying is not true. Here's how you can do it.
>
> Have your crazy complex patch running around all over the place.
>
> Now, for your feedback loop, you need to create a subpatch to "send it".
>
> Make it [pd fb_send]
>
> in it, create a short delay line, give it a cool name like $0-fb, use
> [block~ 1].
>
> then, for your feedback receive, have another subpatch [pd fb_receive]. In
> it, use [delread~ $0-fb 0].

would be great if it worked. (i've tried similar tricks...)

>
> voilá...
>
> check my self frequency modulating oscillator patch attached

the delayed signal is not a sine, when the blocksize in the
receive is <64.

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list