yeah, just checked them and they sound quite the same now ;) I wonder how I screwed up

2016-02-16 12:39 GMT-02:00 Matt Barber <brbrofsvl@gmail.com>:

Yeah, the phase relationships didn't match those in the SC3 code. I'll send the updated patch when I can get to my computer.

On Feb 16, 2016 9:36 AM, "Alexandre Torres Porres" <porres@gmail.com> wrote:

> OK, I had to adjust the Pd patch a little to get it to match the SC3 code.

why? what do you mean? was it wrong?

2016-02-16 6:07 GMT-02:00 Matt Barber <brbrofsvl@gmail.com>:

OK, I had to adjust the Pd patch a little to get it to match the SC3 code. I've made an A/B test: one is SC3 and the other is the matching Pd patch. See if you can tell which one is which, and why you answered the way you did. I went fast and made them 44.1kHz 16-bit; you'll have to live with it. :)

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:55 PM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:

correct code

{VarSaw.ar(LFPulse.kr(1, 0, 0.3, 50, 50), 0, LFTri.ar(1, 0, 0.5, 0.5))!2}.play

2016-02-16 2:54 GMT-02:00 Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com>:

well, while we're at it, here's the patches for you to check and speculate :)

SuperCollider Code;

VarSaw.ar(LFPulse.kr(1, 0, 0.3, 50, 50), 0, LFTri.ar(1, 0, 0.5, 0.5))!2.play

2016-02-16 2:45 GMT-02:00 Matt Barber <brbrofsvl@gmail.com>:

If there is difference between the sound of [triangle~] and VarSaw, it might actually be in the way phase is generated. The algorithms themselves are pretty much the same, but while VarSaw makes its own single-precision phase by simply subtracting 1 when an increment takes it past 1.0 (using a conditional on each sample), [triangle~] is a waveshaper that is fed phase. Pd's phasor is a little idiosyncratic, using a kind of bit-hacking to unwrap phase (the Höldrich method), which is supposed to perform a bit faster than a conditional, and it's inside not just [phasor~] but all the oscillator objects. If I remember correctly it can be prone to phase drift over time, but don't quote me on that.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres <porres@gmail.com> wrote:

I still believe differences between Pd and SC depend on other technical details than the ones presented, because similar objects like triangle~ and VarSaw will just sound quite differently, hence it may rely on subtleties inside the objects themselves. And I'm not talking about the "cultural" use which is something I believe makes quite a difference even in the Pd x Max world (when they both sound quite similar).

cheers

2016-02-15 13:54 GMT-02:00 Andy Farnell <padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk>:

Good list of technical peculiarities Claude. For me, the "sound" is those
quirks combined with how Chris describes a "cultural" or "contextual" use.
I used to be great at knowing the sound of software or hardware sources
and could spot Reaktor, or a Roland analogue in moments. But emulations
got better and my ears got older, and maybe I began to care less about
implementation and more about artistic intent. As Chris says,
different tools tend to make you think and work in certain patterns,
and I think it is this more than anything that constitutes a "sound".

cheers
Andy

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

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