I recently discovered cyclone's Borax object (why is it capitalized?), and think that in many cases, it can replace the built-in poly object. I would like to just say now what my first-glance understanding of the differences are between the two externals are, and to verify from others that this understanding is correct.
"poly" has two distinct modes of operation, voice stealing, and non voice stealing, as specified in the second creation argument.
(a): If the voice stealing mode is is set to zero or unspecified, (don't steal voices), then then mostly, Borax does everything that poly does, except it has more outputs. The "voice number", "pitch", and "velocity" outputs of Borax are mostly identical in function to the three outputs of poly. The only diference is that Borax has no limit on the number of voices, but this is easily emulated by gating on an upper limit of the voice number when using Borax. If you do this, then the function would be exactly the same as if you were using poly. So I think that if you can build Borax on your system, you might as well use it instead of poly, because you lose nothing, and gain other interesting outputs.
or (b): If, on the other hand, the voice stealing mode is set to one, then you can't easily use Borax to replace poly.
Is this about right?
Larry
hi Larry,
the main difference is that Borax is one of those old-style midi-centric Max objects, which do not understand floats and ignore integers outside of the range 0-127.
Besides, Borax filters out pitch duplicates.
Krzysztof
Larry Troxler wrote: ...
were using poly. So I think that if you can build Borax on your system, you might as well use it instead of poly, because you lose nothing, and gain other interesting outputs.
hello
i was going to try the 037 installer for my Mac 10.2.8 Is there a way to only install the -libs? like a custom selection tool?
I just don't want to run into the same trouble i had with a .dmg and Freewrl (a vrml viewer)
I have pd-Gem working pretty darn well and don't want to foof anything before an upcoming perf.
But i need some lissajous representations for a project badly.
All suggestions and caveats greatly pre-shaded.
Open the .dmg, there is a folder called Packages, in there are all of
the individual packages. You could also install it to a different
folder and then take what you want.
.hc
On Friday, Apr 16, 2004, at 09:16 America/New_York, Patrick Pagano
wrote:
hello
i was going to try the 037 installer for my Mac 10.2.8 Is there a way to only install the -libs? like a custom selection tool?
I just don't want to run into the same trouble i had with a .dmg and
Freewrl (a vrml viewer)I have pd-Gem working pretty darn well and don't want to foof anything
before an upcoming perf.But i need some lissajous representations for a project badly.
All suggestions and caveats greatly pre-shaded.
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
There is no way to peace, peace is the way.
-A.J. Muste
i have done that thanks i am having little luck with Scope~
On Friday, April 16, 2004, at 04:56 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
Open the .dmg, there is a folder called Packages, in there are all of
the individual packages. You could also install it to a different
folder and then take what you want..hc
On Friday, Apr 16, 2004, at 09:16 America/New_York, Patrick Pagano
wrote:hello
i was going to try the 037 installer for my Mac 10.2.8 Is there a way to only install the -libs? like a custom selection
tool?I just don't want to run into the same trouble i had with a .dmg and
Freewrl (a vrml viewer)I have pd-Gem working pretty darn well and don't want to foof
anything before an upcoming perf.But i need some lissajous representations for a project badly.
All suggestions and caveats greatly pre-shaded.
PD-list mailing list PD-list@iem.at http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
There is no way to peace, peace is the way. -A.J. Muste
I read:
i am having little luck with Scope~
so what's the problem ? what does pd -verbose say when you try loading it ?
regards,
x
hi Pat,
CK wrote:
I read:
i am having little luck with Scope~
so what's the problem ?
that is right -- cannot tell what your problem is without knowing what ``looking real weird'' really mean... Could you open the scope~.help patch in Pd through [cyclone], then open [pd xy] and compare Scope~'s display in it with the same thing when run in Max? Cannot see any difference here (Pd in linux vs Max in windows).
You are going to get best looking xy curves, probably, for small-frequency inputs, after setting a small period (a float into left inlet, min 2) and a large buffer size ('bufsize' message, max 800).
Krzysztof
I read:
what ``looking real weird'' really mean... Could you open the scope~.help patch in Pd through [cyclone], then open [pd xy] and
and there's a pd native help patch based on the msp reference I had for a while I put it here: http://test.pilot.fm/pd/patches/help/
regards,
x
p.s.: works just fine on linux
On Friday 16 April 2004 08:18, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
hi Larry,
the main difference is that Borax is one of those old-style midi-centric Max objects, which do not understand floats and ignore integers outside of the range 0-127.
poly is quite midi-centric as well; it is hardwired to work with pitch/velocity pairs.
Besides, Borax filters out pitch duplicates.
Ouch. That's good to know.
-
CK -
Hans-Christoph Steiner -
Krzysztof Czaja -
Larry Troxler -
Patrick Pagano