2011/9/20 Roman Haefeli <reduzent@gmail.com>

On Mon, 2011-09-19 at 14:00 -0700, Jonathan Wilkes wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >________________________________
> >From: tim vets <timvets@gmail.com>
> >To: Pierre Massat <pimassat@gmail.com>; James Dunn <james@4thharmonic.com>; pd-list <pd-list@iem.at>
> >Sent: Monday, September 19, 2011 4:08 PM
> >Subject: Re: [PD] stop sample playback when phasor~ reset?
> >
> >
> >When you use phasor~, you normally already know how long it will take for the sound to be finished playing (because you set its frequency to play it back at the proper speed)
> >Store the information about the sound loaded (or recorded) and use that to stop the playback after one play duration.
> >
> >
> >[del <time>]
> >|
> >[t b b]
> >| |
> >[0( [0(
> >[ |
> >[phasor]
>
> What's the benefit of this over a line~ based approach?
>

[line~] is inferior to [phasor~] in that it only starts a ramp on block
boundaries. Using [vline~] seems to me most flexible in terms of sample
playback as it can start a ramp even in-between samples.

Using [threshold~] or any other method to detect the reset of [phasor~]
is not feasible, because of two reasons:
* [threshold] (but also [snapshot~]) output the bang only at block
bounaries, so the detection is not very precise
* Whenever the the audio domain (a signal) causes an event in the
message domain (that's what [threshold~] and [snapshot~] are for), the
event is at least one block late.

There is still one advantage of [phasor~] over [vline~]: The speed of
the [phasor~] can be changed at signal rate, so one can create
continuous pitch changes when playing the sample. That's not possible
with [vline~].

Roman