Pd's oscillator wave tables are 512 samples. Supercollider uses 8192 - not sure what CSound uses. The efficiency of the SC code allows for large sample tables and bigger FFTs, which certainly help make a 'smoother' sound.
It would be interesting to hear what happens with 16x larger tables in Pd.
PS - Amazing that Andy Moorer replied to the blog about the SC version!
Yep I did that as an exercise way back. Lost the code
and wavs now sorry to say :(
But, yes it did show up the weakness of Pd oscils
when compared to Csound - somewhat muddier, with
a slight distortion when using so many.
IIRC its a saw/string like wave and I made it
bandlimited by filling tables and felt very
confident it couldn't be aliasing because
I calculated no sweeps put any harmonics even
close to Nyquist. So, he difference tis kinda
to do with the small table size or interpolation
in Pd I think. Of course in Csound it sounds
gorgeous.
a.
--
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:43:58 -0700 (PDT)
Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Reading the whole discussion about "smooth" sounds made me think of this
> exercise:
>
> http://www.batuhanbozkurt.com/instruction/recreating-the-thx-deep-note
>
> Any Pd peeps interested in trying to reproduce the THX sound? I'd really
> be interested in comparing the result to the original, as well as the pd
> patch to the supercollider code.
>
> -Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sent from my 3 (http://three.co.uk) mobile broadband
Third world internet for a first world economy.
* 20 bytes/second * 99% packet loss * 60 second latency
All for only £20/month (Odious and predatory terms apply)
_______________________________________________
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list