have you made a good oldschool pd synth? anything i make sounds like some roland groovebox from the 90's.
anyone got any cool old rave sounds?
On 12/03/2007, at 11.56, hard off wrote:
have you made a good oldschool pd synth? anything i make sounds like some roland groovebox from the 90's.
Frank's got a 303 thingy, http://footils.org/cms/show/19
I'd be surprised if Andy doesn't have some oldtech sounding stuff about.
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
Dunno if you can make this into anything useful. It's very nasty.
twin vari-slope triangle -> chebyshev waveshaper -> formant ^ | |_________________ FM feedback ________|
I was trying to get something like a "virus" sound for a mate who is into jungle. This is the "weaponised" version with no anti-aliasing whatsoever (apparently that makes it sound better). Careful, it's already claimed one set of speakers. You might want to put some filters on the output to tame it a bit.
But it's not classic "hoover". You want lots of detuned triangles for that. Somewhere there's one called Edgar.pd I made which does that quite nicely, but just rip the dual slope triangle out of this one, dupe it a few times and give them a spread of about 3%, that's the secret ingredient.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
That synth is sick. Reminds me of my days idolizing Ed Rush and Optical.
~Kyle
On 3/13/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
Dunno if you can make this into anything useful. It's very nasty.
twin vari-slope triangle -> chebyshev waveshaper -> formant ^ | |_________________ FM feedback ________|
I was trying to get something like a "virus" sound for a mate who is into jungle. This is the "weaponised" version with no anti-aliasing whatsoever (apparently that makes it sound better). Careful, it's already claimed one set of speakers. You might want to put some filters on the output to tame it a bit.
But it's not classic "hoover". You want lots of detuned triangles for that. Somewhere there's one called Edgar.pd I made which does that quite nicely, but just rip the dual slope triangle out of this one, dupe it a few times and give them a spread of about 3%, that's the secret ingredient.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
Hallo, padawan12 hat gesagt: // padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
They are part of GGEE.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
dude - you are a ninja. uhm, i mean, a jedi. seriously - i want to emulate you a bit when i grow up ;P
that said, what resources would you recommend that illustrate calculus as used for signal processing, but from a more functional point of view as opposed to a theoretical one. i know there are dsp chip programming guides for engineering, but there seems to be only "how" and not the "why" in most cases there. too theoretical of descriptions makes it difficult for me to visualize the action or imagine the sonic implications of the theory being discussed.
personally, i find that the application of theories make much more sense than the abstract theories themselves. maybe it's brain damage, or perhaps plain 'ol ignorance.
but anyway, here's a simple example:
someone tells me an empirical definition of the nyquist theory, it's hard to get my head around. but if someone says "hey, you can't sample a frequency that is >= 1/2 of the sample rate, because the wavelength is too short in duration to fit sample boundaries, and it causes distortions that are related to the frequency being sampled." that totally makes sense. i can picture that from a functional point of view, and then have a much easier time with the math an theory of it.
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
thanks and high regards, star
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:24 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Hallo, shift8 hat gesagt: // shift8 wrote:
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
I think, without some abstraction (sic!) one wouldn't get far with Pd. It's just not a tool for ignoring certain rather abstract issues. But I don't think you're looking for such a tool anyways. So for starters I would recommend "Computer Music" by Dodge/Jerse. It doesn't skip the necessary math, but has a good way of explaining it and illustrating its use from a practical POV. It's definitly a book every aspiring Pd user should read. I won't say the same of the "Computer Music Tutorial", which IMO often is a bit to, uhm, referential: It's very complete in its scope, but too often just directs you to a paper or another book if you want to know the real details. And it's too heavy to carry around in your bag.
A personal favourite of mine then is F.R. Moore's "Elements of Computer Music", but it doesn't fit your description. But I come back to it again and again, while my CMT is collecting dust.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
Funny, I tend to recommend two books to people: the Dodge/Jerse one for those who aren't mathematical (like myself), and the Roads one (the "CMT") for those who are. Keeping in mind that whole chapters of the revised Dodge/Jerse--basically all the chapters on anything which are contemporary like granular synthesis--have been lifted almost verbatim from Curtis Roads' works, the Dodge/Jerse book is an excellent introduction. I still find that the "CMT" is like a bible, and when I'm scratching my head I can browse through it to find the right starting point. But it would be much more incomprehensible without the headstart I got from the Dodge/Jerse book.
best, d.
Frank Barknecht wrote:
I think, without some abstraction (sic!) one wouldn't get far with Pd. It's just not a tool for ignoring certain rather abstract issues. But I don't think you're looking for such a tool anyways. So for starters I would recommend "Computer Music" by Dodge/Jerse. It doesn't skip the necessary math, but has a good way of explaining it and illustrating its use from a practical POV. It's definitly a book every aspiring Pd user should read. I won't say the same of the "Computer Music Tutorial", which IMO often is a bit to, uhm, referential: It's very complete in its scope, but too often just directs you to a paper or another book if you want to know the real details. And it's too heavy to carry around in your bag.
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 20:45 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, shift8 hat gesagt: // shift8 wrote:
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
I think, without some abstraction (sic!) one wouldn't get far with Pd.
heh :)
It's just not a tool for ignoring certain rather abstract issues. But I don't think you're looking for such a tool anyways. So for starters I would recommend "Computer Music" by Dodge/Jerse. It doesn't skip the necessary math, but has a good way of explaining it and illustrating its use from a practical POV.
sounds perfect - amazon i presume? cc would be dope tho...
It's definitly a book every aspiring Pd user should read. I won't say the same of the "Computer Music Tutorial", which IMO often is a bit to, uhm, referential: It's very complete in its scope, but too often just directs you to a paper or another book if you want to know the real details. And it's too heavy to carry around in your bag.
'k
A personal favourite of mine then is F.R. Moore's "Elements of Computer Music", but it doesn't fit your description. But I come back to it again and again, while my CMT is collecting dust.
ok, but i'm intrigued - i've almost always been a fan of your pd studies, and appreciate that often that's exactly what they are - illustrations of less then obvious techniques. this book inspires that to some extent?
Ciao
l8
Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
Hallo, shift8 hat gesagt: // shift8 wrote:
A personal favourite of mine then is F.R. Moore's "Elements of Computer Music", but it doesn't fit your description. But I come back to it again and again, while my CMT is collecting dust.
ok, but i'm intrigued - i've almost always been a fan of your pd studies, and appreciate that often that's exactly what they are - illustrations of less then obvious techniques. this book inspires that to some extent?
Not more than the others. But "Elements" is *the* classic textbook on computer music, everything - Dodges/Jerse, Roads - else came afterwards, and it's still one of the best written books in that area, has tons of useful source code and it starts with explain the Fourier Transform instead of putting it somewhere in the middle.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
Hallo, Frank Barknecht hat gesagt: // Frank Barknecht wrote:
Not more than the others. But "Elements" is *the* classic textbook on computer music, everything - Dodges/Jerse, Roads - else came afterwards
Ah, sorry, I got that wrong: The first edition of the Dogde/Jerse is older than "Elements of ..."
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
shift8 shift8@digitrash.com writes:
sounds perfect - amazon i presume? cc would be dope tho...
If you're on a budget you can always try http://www.abebooks.com.
./MiS
Frank Barknecht schreef:
Hallo, shift8 hat gesagt: // shift8 wrote:
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
The Theory and Technique of Electronic Music?
http://crca.ucsd.edu/~msp/techniques.htm
m
On 15/03/2007, at 14.54, shift8 wrote:
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject
of dsp in a style like this?
There is also
"Music: a Mathematical Offering" by Dave Benson URL: http://www.maths.abdn.ac.uk/~bensondj/html/maths-music.html
There is a free and regularly updated PDF version on that site. Also
it was reviewed in the February issue of The Wire Mag.
From the TOC:
- Digital music
7.1 Digital signals 7.2 Dithering 7.3 WAV and MP3 files 7.4 MIDI 7.5 Delta functions and sampling 7.6 Nyquist's theorem 7.7 The z-transform 7.8 Digital filters 7.9 The discrete Fourier transform 7.10 The fast Fourier transform
- Synthesis
8.1 Introduction 8.2 Envelopes and LFOs 8.3 Additive synthesis 8.4 Physical modeling 8.5 The Karplus-Strong algorithm 8.6 Filter analysis for the Karplus-Strong algorithm 8.7 Amplitude and frequency modulation 8.8 The Yamaha DX7 and FM synthesis 8.9 Feedback, or self-modulation 8.10 CSound 8.11 FM synthesis using CSound 8.12 Simple FM instruments 8.13 Further techniques in CSound 8.14 Other methods of synthesis 8.15 The phase vocoder 8.16 Chebychev polynomials
I like this topic. In fact is was thinking about requesting folks
bibtex files for inspiration. Anyone?
excellent lead - thanks! i love this list :)
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 21:43 +0100, Steffen wrote:
On 15/03/2007, at 14.54, shift8 wrote:
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject
of dsp in a style like this?There is also
"Music: a Mathematical Offering" by Dave Benson URL: http://www.maths.abdn.ac.uk/~bensondj/html/maths-music.html
There is a free and regularly updated PDF version on that site. Also
it was reviewed in the February issue of The Wire Mag.From the TOC:
- Digital music
7.1 Digital signals 7.2 Dithering 7.3 WAV and MP3 files 7.4 MIDI 7.5 Delta functions and sampling 7.6 Nyquist's theorem 7.7 The z-transform 7.8 Digital filters 7.9 The discrete Fourier transform 7.10 The fast Fourier transform
- Synthesis
8.1 Introduction 8.2 Envelopes and LFOs 8.3 Additive synthesis 8.4 Physical modeling 8.5 The Karplus-Strong algorithm 8.6 Filter analysis for the Karplus-Strong algorithm 8.7 Amplitude and frequency modulation 8.8 The Yamaha DX7 and FM synthesis 8.9 Feedback, or self-modulation 8.10 CSound 8.11 FM synthesis using CSound 8.12 Simple FM instruments 8.13 Further techniques in CSound 8.14 Other methods of synthesis 8.15 The phase vocoder 8.16 Chebychev polynomials
I like this topic. In fact is was thinking about requesting folks
bibtex files for inspiration. Anyone?
wow - super big ups for all of the responses on this. thanks every one. don't want to gush, but damn....
community knowledge++
!!
Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
Not sure if it's exactly what you are after, but "the computer musical tutorial" by Curtis Roads, takes you through it all in a not too scientific/mathematic way. Actually I think it accompanies PD extremely well.
http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Music-Tutorial-Curtis-Roads/dp/0262680823/ref...
I hope you'll find it useful.
Cheers! Thomas
----- Original Message ----- From: "shift8" shift8@digitrash.com To: "padawan12" padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk Cc: pd-list@iem.at; "Josh Steiner" josh@vitriolix.com; hard.off@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 6:54 AM Subject: Re: [PD] oldschool rave synths
dude - you are a ninja. uhm, i mean, a jedi. seriously - i want to emulate you a bit when i grow up ;P
that said, what resources would you recommend that illustrate calculus as used for signal processing, but from a more functional point of view as opposed to a theoretical one. i know there are dsp chip programming guides for engineering, but there seems to be only "how" and not the "why" in most cases there. too theoretical of descriptions makes it difficult for me to visualize the action or imagine the sonic implications of the theory being discussed.
personally, i find that the application of theories make much more sense than the abstract theories themselves. maybe it's brain damage, or perhaps plain 'ol ignorance.
but anyway, here's a simple example:
someone tells me an empirical definition of the nyquist theory, it's hard to get my head around. but if someone says "hey, you can't sample a frequency that is >= 1/2 of the sample rate, because the wavelength is too short in duration to fit sample boundaries, and it causes distortions that are related to the frequency being sampled." that totally makes sense. i can picture that from a functional point of view, and then have a much easier time with the math an theory of it.
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
thanks and high regards, star
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:24 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.10/720 - Release Date: 12-03-2007 19:19
man - so many good recommendations - thx^3!
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 19:38 -0700, Thomas Jeppesen wrote:
Not sure if it's exactly what you are after, but "the computer musical tutorial" by Curtis Roads, takes you through it all in a not too scientific/mathematic way. Actually I think it accompanies PD extremely well.
http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Music-Tutorial-Curtis-Roads/dp/0262680823/ref...
I hope you'll find it useful.
Cheers! Thomas
----- Original Message ----- From: "shift8" shift8@digitrash.com To: "padawan12" padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk Cc: pd-list@iem.at; "Josh Steiner" josh@vitriolix.com; hard.off@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 6:54 AM Subject: Re: [PD] oldschool rave synths
dude - you are a ninja. uhm, i mean, a jedi. seriously - i want to emulate you a bit when i grow up ;P
that said, what resources would you recommend that illustrate calculus as used for signal processing, but from a more functional point of view as opposed to a theoretical one. i know there are dsp chip programming guides for engineering, but there seems to be only "how" and not the "why" in most cases there. too theoretical of descriptions makes it difficult for me to visualize the action or imagine the sonic implications of the theory being discussed.
personally, i find that the application of theories make much more sense than the abstract theories themselves. maybe it's brain damage, or perhaps plain 'ol ignorance.
but anyway, here's a simple example:
someone tells me an empirical definition of the nyquist theory, it's hard to get my head around. but if someone says "hey, you can't sample a frequency that is >= 1/2 of the sample rate, because the wavelength is too short in duration to fit sample boundaries, and it causes distortions that are related to the frequency being sampled." that totally makes sense. i can picture that from a functional point of view, and then have a much easier time with the math an theory of it.
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
thanks and high regards, star
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:24 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.10/720 - Release Date: 12-03-2007 19:19
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:54:40 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
what resources would you recommend that illustrate calculus as used for signal processing, but from a more functional point of view as opposed to a theoretical one.
I heartily recommend Steven W Smiths "Scientists and Engineers guide to DSP", before tackling Perry Cook, Eduardo Miranda and our own Miller Puckette. Calculus is only a small part of the picture, maybe you use the word too broadly because it's just a technique that helps understand certain equations. For calculus you needn't really go above A level, a little of that with a good grasp of algebra, trig and geometry are a solid enough basis. Linear algebra and matrices are some useful tricks to put in your bag, and you can get a long way by reading many of the tutorials for Octave.
http://www.dspguide.com/ http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Sound-Synthesis-Interactive-Applications/dp/156...
As Chuckk and some of the other mathematicians have said here, some esoteric pure math like operator theory subsumes the whole subject, because sound is about changes and transformations, but I wonder what other peoples top 10 'must have' concepts are. I suppose it depends on your goals, for example a lot of composers learn a disproportionate amount of stats and distributions.
i know there are dsp chip programming guides for engineering, but there seems to be only "how" and not the "why" in most cases there. too theoretical of descriptions makes it difficult for me to visualize the action or imagine the sonic implications of the theory being discussed.
personally, i find that the application of theories make much more sense than the abstract theories themselves. maybe it's brain damage, or perhaps plain 'ol ignorance.
but anyway, here's a simple example:
someone tells me an empirical definition of the nyquist theory, it's hard to get my head around. but if someone says "hey, you can't sample a frequency that is >= 1/2 of the sample rate, because the wavelength is too short in duration to fit sample boundaries, and it causes distortions that are related to the frequency being sampled." that totally makes sense. i can picture that from a functional point of view, and then have a much easier time with the math an theory of it.
I strongly agree with you about teaching theory in context. It is hard to pick good examples and write using only words so that the knowledge sticks. Sometimes symbolic representation is the only way to be unambiguous. That is why Puredata is a powerful teaching and exploration tool, the diagram is the program. We are also lucky to have people like Derek and Frank who write from a position of "least assumptions". I find a lot can be learned by just browsing the archives.
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
One of Eduardo Mirandas more gentle books "Computer Sound Design" gives a pretty broad read, it also has some fun Windows and Mac software on the CD ROM. And you can't go wrong reading classics like Roads.
Perhaps it's important to know that classic DSP is only a part of synthesis and analysis. It's the "implementation" layer.
Another area of wisdom to explore is physics. I like to start sound design lectures by explaining that sound is a branch of dynamics, particularly fluid dynamics. Physics really helps design realistic sound effects, to know about propagation, interference, reflection, damping, stress, elasticity and all that. Then you can make ballpark models of what sound waves are doing in an object of given materials and dimensions. There's a big section in the book I'm writing about knowledge, imperative, declarative and procedural, and how to move from a description to a model to a method. Really this is Software Engineering, but that's what we are doing at the end of the day.
Empirical knowledge is so important too ( I think you use that term a bit incorrectly above). All the good synthesists seem to learn by experience, lots of experience gained during thousands of hours of playing about with code. It's no discredit to people like Eno and Bristow that they probably don't know a Bessel function from an Aardvark, but are masters of FM because they simply know it inside out in a practical way. Many accomplished producers work this way, the theory follows later to connect the wealth of practical experience they gain in the studio. There's no "right" way to do it. However the sooner you have theory the better you will have consistent and reproducible results because you get why something works rather than just observing that it does.
thanks and high regards, star
Cheers, thanks for the encouragement dude, but I am not a Jedi yet ;) Not by a long way. The term that describes my situation is "Ronin".
As for ninjas, I believe they are only mercenary assassins. They would be no match for Pirates. Yaaar. This Slashdot poll settles the matter once and for all :) http://slashdot.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=1396
best, Andy
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:24 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
Hallo, padawan12 hat gesagt: // padawan12 wrote:
Another area of wisdom to explore is physics. I like to start sound design lectures by explaining that sound is a branch of dynamics, particularly fluid dynamics. Physics really helps design realistic sound effects, to know about propagation, interference, reflection, damping, stress, elasticity and all that. Then you can make ballpark models of what sound waves are doing in an object of given materials and dimensions.
An interesting book in this area is Perry R. Cook's "Real Sound Synthesis for Interactive Applications". (Cook is the main author of STK). I wouldn't recommend it for a beginner, though, and sometimes it doesn't go into enough detail for my taste, but there's always the JO Smith's website for the formulas.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:26:15 +0100 Frank Barknecht fbar@footils.org wrote:
.. but there's always the JO Smith's website for the formulas.
Ah yes for more advanced, Julius Smith physical modelling guru
http://www-ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/index.html
Dave Bensons (with the free pdf of his book)
http://www.maths.abdn.ac.uk/~bensondj/html/maths-music.html
Mustn't forget the great resource at
any other good shares? :)
Andy
On Fri, 2007-03-16 at 08:26 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:54:40 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
what resources would you recommend that illustrate calculus as used for signal processing, but from a more functional point of view as opposed to a theoretical one.
I heartily recommend Steven W Smiths "Scientists and Engineers guide to DSP", before tackling Perry Cook, Eduardo Miranda and our own Miller Puckette. Calculus is only a small part of the picture, maybe you use the word too broadly because it's just a technique that helps understand certain equations. For calculus you needn't really go above A level, a little of that with a good grasp of algebra, trig and geometry are a solid enough basis. Linear algebra and matrices are some useful tricks to put in your bag, and you can get a long way by reading many of the tutorials for Octave.
this site rocks!
haven't seen this one - will check it out.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Sound-Synthesis-Interactive-Applications/dp/156...
As Chuckk and some of the other mathematicians have said here, some esoteric pure math like operator theory subsumes the whole subject, because sound is about changes and transformations, but I wonder what other peoples top 10 'must have' concepts are. I suppose it depends on your goals, for example a lot of composers learn a disproportionate amount of stats and distributions.
i have been playing around with those a bit from a very lay perspective
- mostly randomized scales w/ occasional octave shifting (random w/ %,
usually). i'm a fan of generative work, and hope to get better at it as time goes by and i better my skills.
i know there are dsp chip programming guides for engineering, but there seems to be only "how" and not the "why" in most cases there. too theoretical of descriptions makes it difficult for me to visualize the action or imagine the sonic implications of the theory being discussed.
personally, i find that the application of theories make much more sense than the abstract theories themselves. maybe it's brain damage, or perhaps plain 'ol ignorance.
but anyway, here's a simple example:
someone tells me an empirical definition of the nyquist theory, it's hard to get my head around. but if someone says "hey, you can't sample a frequency that is >= 1/2 of the sample rate, because the wavelength is too short in duration to fit sample boundaries, and it causes distortions that are related to the frequency being sampled." that totally makes sense. i can picture that from a functional point of view, and then have a much easier time with the math an theory of it.
I strongly agree with you about teaching theory in context. It is hard to pick good examples and write using only words so that the knowledge sticks. Sometimes symbolic representation is the only way to be unambiguous. That is why Puredata is a powerful teaching and exploration tool, the diagram is the program. We are also lucky to have people like Derek and Frank who write from a position of "least assumptions". I find a lot can be learned by just browsing the archives.
truly - i've learned so much from pd, the help docs (brilliantly implemented in pd themselves), and all of the rocking folks that share their ideas w/ the list so often. the pd archive is a super bad ass resource - one of the days i'm going to throw together a script that culls patches from the archives and makes the containing mail the readme.txt for them.
are there any resources, books, etc out that approach the subject of dsp in a style like this?
One of Eduardo Mirandas more gentle books "Computer Sound Design" gives a pretty broad read, it also has some fun Windows and Mac software on the CD ROM. And you can't go wrong reading classics like Roads.
that's like the 3rd recommendation for Rhoads - guess i'll be picking that one up :)
Perhaps it's important to know that classic DSP is only a part of synthesis and analysis. It's the "implementation" layer.
true - but i think the digital representation has a definite impact on technique.
Another area of wisdom to explore is physics. I like to start sound design lectures by explaining that sound is a branch of dynamics, particularly fluid dynamics. Physics really helps design realistic sound effects, to know about propagation, interference, reflection, damping, stress, elasticity and all that. Then you can make ballpark models of what sound waves are doing in an object of given materials and dimensions. There's a big section in the book I'm writing about knowledge, imperative, declarative and procedural, and how to move from a description to a model to a method. Really this is Software Engineering, but that's what we are doing at the end of the day.
software and systems arch is what i do for a living, and one of the big reasons why pd has such a draw to me. i'm much better at control-flow design then ssynthisys (hence my post i guess...)
others reasons for interest are a bit more abstract - the concept of dataflow languages in general, real-time feedback in the development process. it's like what uml should be (kinda:). other ideas that drive my interests here are developments like the "Seed" game prototype, the concept of synthesizing *anything* - generic "assemblers", a la the Diamond Age (you know, the non-apocalyptic kind :), moving away from static content in general, the basic sameness of images and audio in time and frequency space, etc etc.
physics has always held my interest (i grew up on a diet of omni magazine, popular mechanics, hard sci-fi, etc.) knowledge of basic physics tends it makes living in the material world a lot less stressful and danger-prone too :)
the only thing about physical modeling synthesis that gets me is the sheer amount of time it takes to model sounds based around the (often many!) physical properties of the instrument/object/machine etc being modeled. then again - that's one of the reasons i dig your work so much :)
Empirical knowledge is so important too ( I think you use that term a bit incorrectly above).\
sorry - i've been up all night. that's my exscuse, and i'm sticking to it. or somethin. heh - let's call it antonym-based dislexia. theoretical would have fit much better in that sentence for sure :)
All the good synthesists seem to learn by experience, lots of experience gained during thousands of hours of playing about with code. It's no discredit to people like Eno and Bristow that they probably don't know a Bessel function from an Aardvark, but are masters of FM because they simply know it inside out in a practical way. Many accomplished producers work this way, the theory follows later to connect the wealth of practical experience they gain in the studio. There's no "right" way to do it. However the sooner you have theory the better you will have consistent and reproducible results because you get why something works rather than just observing that it does.
that's kinda where i'm coming from i think - i love old analog gear (my favs being the ultra-simple mc202, the korg electribe analog modeled drum machine, synth seq and the like), and oddly, i think that's also what drives me to dig deeper into synthesis w/ pd and the like - technologies like OSC bring us back to something approximating the analog world (or can, i should say). i've always been a tinkerer, and have an innate desire to know how things work. more so for things that i really like.
thanks and high regards, star
Cheers, thanks for the encouragement dude, but I am not a Jedi yet ;) Not by a long way. The term that describes my situation is "Ronin".
so... a samurai w/ no master? :)
As for ninjas, I believe they are only mercenary assassins. They would be no match for Pirates. Yaaar. This Slashdot poll settles the matter once and for all :) http://slashdot.org/pollBooth.pl?qid=1396
hells yeah! pirates, hands down.
with respect, star
best, Andy
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 15:24 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
[pow~] is from cyclone, I think in the case I used it (pow 2) you can replace it with an equivilent [expr~] expression or [*~]. I thought [lowpass] and [highpass] were vanilla. They are needed to set the coeffs for biquad~
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:49:29 -0800 Josh Steiner josh@vitriolix.com wrote:
i seem to be missing:
lowpass, highpass and pow~
running 0.39.2-extended-test7 on winxp
-josh
padawan12 wrote:
Sorry Hardoff, scratch that last load of rubbish. The parasite synth is the wrong patch, and I thought I was talking about different oscillators, it should have been something more like the ones here. The oscillator is a dual-slope one in hoover-triangles.pd, much easier to pull out than the last mess.
Another take is the hoover-pwm.pd, which is a juno voice basically, it's much brighter and fizzy down low. It just depends what you want more in the low registers, up high theres not so much difference. One is pulse width mod of a square, the other is slope mod of a triangle, both have a bit of frequency lfo on too at about 5 Hz. A fat Juno hoover noise uses the fast chorus so there's one on both versions. Each has the same sequence so you can compare the sounds. All the hoover flavours have a different character, like a highpass resonant filter makes an interesting addition. But what they share in common is a busy sound made by having 3 or 4 detuned components. Juno is a pwm + saw + square mix, with the square an octave down.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 22:34:01 +0900 "hard off" hard.off@gmail.com wrote:
andy's tokyo techno one is cool.
but i want hoovers. i keep try to make them and they always suck. there must have been a secret ingredient that i am forgetting.
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- ________________________________________________________________ tasty electronic music vittles -- bluevitriol.com the only music blog you need -- playtherecords.com you are the dj. interactive music -- improbableorchestra.com random observations of the bizarre -- vitriolix.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-- Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:49:13 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
truly - i've learned so much from pd, the help docs (brilliantly implemented in pd themselves), and all of the rocking folks that share
Yeah, massive community bigup, it's really coming together now. You don't realise the incremental improvements most of the time when you're close to a program, then one day you download the latest and it's "oh that's fixed, this works now, there's shitloads more helpfiles, it's really good!" And cross platform is rocking too. I get more things working with mates who use Mac and Win than in the past.
moving away from static content in general, the basic sameness of images and audio in time and frequency space, etc etc.
Yeah, I'm totally into procedural content, programs good, data bad :}
"spore", not "seed" - sry :)
looks like eno's doing a procedural / generative sound track for it!
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009261.php
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 16:49 -0700, shift8 wrote:
my interests here are developments like the "Seed" game prototype, the concept of synthesizing *anything* - generic "assemblers", a la the
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:55:39 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
"spore", not "seed" - sry :)
looks like eno's doing a procedural / generative sound track for it!
Yeah I checked that out. It's procedural music, basically what we do in puredata.
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009261.php
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 16:49 -0700, shift8 wrote:
my interests here are developments like the "Seed" game prototype, the concept of synthesizing *anything* - generic "assemblers", a la the
That's what I really mean by "procedural audio", but with an important constraint. As opposed to synthetic sound, procedural sound is run real-time on the client. Synthetic sound *can be* computed a priori in the studio and recorded. Spore seemed to be hinting at the former, which get me very excited because it's exactly my work with physics engine tie in to the sounds, but from what I can make of their propaganda it isn't actually what they are doing. I hear that EA are using Puredata now, but still for synthetic sound. I don't actually know any examples of games working with runtime sound synthesis objects.
-- Mechanize something idiosyncratic.
On Sat, 2007-03-24 at 05:54 +0000, padawan12 wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 10:55:39 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
"spore", not "seed" - sry :)
looks like eno's doing a procedural / generative sound track for it!
Yeah I checked that out. It's procedural music, basically what we do in puredata.
pretty cool!
http://www.we-make-money-not-art.com/archives/009261.php
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 16:49 -0700, shift8 wrote:
my interests here are developments like the "Seed" game prototype, the concept of synthesizing *anything* - generic "assemblers", a la the
That's what I really mean by "procedural audio", but with an important constraint. As opposed to synthetic sound, procedural sound is run real-time on the client. Synthetic sound *can be* computed a priori in the studio and recorded. Spore seemed to be hinting at the former, which get me very excited because it's exactly my work with physics engine tie in to the sounds, but from what I can make of their propaganda it isn't actually what they are doing. I hear that EA are using Puredata now, but still for synthetic sound. I don't actually know any examples of games working with runtime sound synthesis objects.
got it - i was using the term to mean synthesis on the client... or something :) the concept of storing descriptors of sound events in the game source, and synthesising then on the client. same for terrain generation, fractal trees, etc. those are really exciting to me.
there was a gamasutra article a couple of years or so ago that covers this a little, though i don't know any actual games that use it ether.
they moved it to a "must be logged in" section for some reason, but it's a free membership for viewing:
http://www.gamasutra.com/resource_guide/20030528/paul_01.shtml
On 3/16/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:54:40 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
As Chuckk and some of the other mathematicians have said here, some esoteric pure math like operator theory subsumes the whole subject, because
Wait, what? I wish I was a mathematician. Do I come across that way? I don't know what operator theory is, but I guess if it's related to what I've said about music cognition, then I have some idea.
sound is about changes and transformations, but I wonder what other peoples top 10 'must have' concepts are. I suppose it depends on your goals, for example a lot of composers learn a disproportionate amount of stats and distributions.
I'm humbled by those guys. I borrowed an extra book from my probability teacher (since probability class at an art school is kind of tame), hoping to understand Gaussian, Poisson, etc., after seeing them in the Csound manual, but I'm kind of marooned. I've actually had some pretty heated (and useless) arguments with teachers about "form" in music. I argue that it doesn't exist, e.g. that the beginning and end don't work the same way and so form is kind of a misnomer. You never apprehend the object as a whole, because you don't know what comes next. Then again, I just apprehended that bottle of lager as a whole, so I'm not sure if I'm making much sense... Viva la dialectic.
-Chuckk
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:56:46 -0400 "Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/16/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:54:40 -0700 shift8 shift8@digitrash.com wrote:
As Chuckk and some of the other mathematicians have said here, some esoteric pure math like operator theory subsumes the whole subject, because
Wait, what? I wish I was a mathematician. Do I come across that way? I don't know what operator theory is, but I guess if it's related to what I've said about music cognition, then I have some idea.
One k too many, I meant t'other Charlie :) I'm sure C.Henry once said there was something to be said for looking at operator theory, maybe I totally misunderstood because thats well beyond me.
sound is about changes and transformations, but I wonder what other peoples top 10 'must have' concepts are. I suppose it depends on your goals, for example a lot of composers learn a disproportionate amount of stats and distributions.
I'm humbled by those guys. I borrowed an extra book from my probability teacher (since probability class at an art school is kind of tame), hoping to understand Gaussian, Poisson, etc., after seeing them in the Csound manual, but I'm kind of marooned.
Can you remember what it was? I say disproportionate, but really from ignorance of use in composition. For sounds generally they are useful. The times I've encountered that theory was with water, where I found bilinear exponential to be useful, gaussian normal and 1/f for damping effects.
I think there was bit of talk on this list about perlin noise and somebody mentioned 3D terrain generation, I'm generally interested in that and other natural distributions that can be used for textutred extents. I think if I understood more behind the statistical theories I could link them better to observed physical behaviours. But there's a lot to think about,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution
Having the graphs printed on the right is really useful because in stats talk some familiar curves are called by different names.
Probably half of them are no use for sound applications at all. Poisson should be useful for rain and breaking glass and quite sparse events I guess. Also I thought all the tons of stats work that's been done on earthquakes is probably useful to model any type of frictional excitation generally, I mean if it works for tectonic plates aren't the same principles there between a violin bow and a string?
You never apprehend the object as a whole, because you don't know what comes next. Then again, I just apprehended that bottle of lager as a whole, so I'm not sure if I'm making much sense...
I think beer is triangular, up to a point everything improves linearly, then it all turns to bollocks and goes downhill at roughly the same rate:)
peace, Andy
Viva la dialectic.
-Chuckk
-- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
On 16/03/2007, at 22.26, padawan12 wrote:
One k too many, I meant t'other Charlie :) I'm sure C.Henry once
said there was something to be said for looking at operator theory, maybe I
totally misunderstood because thats well beyond me.
You might think of this email: http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2006-08/040561.html
Two side notes:
- 1 -
It would be cool if people have a bibtex or other reference file to
share. There often come some reference to some PDF that someone wrote
up to a proceeding or to some journal. And often they are directly
linked to Pd, and at other times they are about a general dsp/
synthesis topic.
I ask since while these mastodon and influential text books are good
there is a lot of stuff spread out in journals and proceedings that
are worth reading and which are detailed and interesting on it's own.
- 2 -
The relates to a prayer i have been meaning to say: Some of the cool
stuff people make or implement in Pd often use some technique or are
inspired by some article (or part of a book). It would be really nice
with more references in those patches.
Note that i don't say that since i'm lazy and just don't bother to
ready the books mentioned in this thread - in fact i can't wait to
read them and have been meaning to for a while, but don't have had
the time.
I say that since i don't have a music or new-media background hence
it's hard to put thing into an over all picture of what is techniques
are about - much like what i think is shift8 motivation for the
request, to get a picture of what is out there and what does it do.
I also believe that adding such lill info in patches, that i request
in my prayer, will aid the use Pd in conventional (university
courses) as well as unconventional (workshops, self-learning)
learning environments.
And yeah. Big up to the community power.
On 3/16/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:56:46 -0400 "Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/16/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
As Chuckk and some of the other mathematicians have said here, some esoteric pure math like operator theory subsumes the whole subject, because
Wait, what? I wish I was a mathematician. Do I come across that way? I don't know what operator theory is, but I guess if it's related to what I've said about music cognition, then I have some idea.
One k too many, I meant t'other Charlie :) I'm sure C.Henry once said there was something to be said for looking at operator theory, maybe I totally misunderstood because thats well beyond me.
I realized after I posted that you must have meant him, but alas I was too tipsy to respond again.
sound is about changes and transformations, but I wonder what other peoples top 10 'must have' concepts are. I suppose it depends on your goals, for example a lot of composers learn a disproportionate amount of stats and distributions.
I'm humbled by those guys. I borrowed an extra book from my probability teacher (since probability class at an art school is kind of tame), hoping to understand Gaussian, Poisson, etc., after seeing them in the Csound manual, but I'm kind of marooned.
Can you remember what it was? I say disproportionate, but really from ignorance
What what was? The Csound opcode? I do think of it as overkill for synthesis purposes, but people use Csound for lots of other purposes. I guess for algorithmic composition that kind of specificity is indispensible.
You never apprehend the object as a whole, because you don't know what comes next. Then again, I just apprehended that bottle of lager as a whole, so I'm not sure if I'm making much sense...
I think beer is triangular, up to a point everything improves linearly, then it all turns to bollocks and goes downhill at roughly the same rate:)
It might have been smoother if I had distributed the beer more uniformly across the 10 minutes I took to drink it. Or I could have used a smaller hop size to get more gradual changes.
-Chuckk
Nice pun!
~Kyle
On 3/16/07, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
It might have been smoother if I had distributed the beer more uniformly across the 10 minutes I took to drink it. Or I could have used a smaller hop size to get more gradual changes.
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:06:37 -0400 "Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
What what was? The Csound opcode?
No the book on stats for music applications.
I do think of it as overkill for synthesis purposes, but people use Csound for lots of other purposes. I guess for algorithmic composition that kind of specificity is indispensible.
I'd argue for its audio precision, but then it's not realtime (by design) in the same way that Pd is. Not sure what control stuff you could do in csound that you couldn't in Pd (?) Never really loved the score<->orchestra dichotomy either, without that wall to negotiate I think you have more freedom in instrument design and in generation.
It might have been smoother if I had distributed the beer more uniformly across the 10 minutes I took to drink it. Or I could have used a smaller hop size to get more gradual changes.
Hop size, yeah :)
On 3/17/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:06:37 -0400 "Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
What what was? The Csound opcode?
No the book on stats for music applications.
Alas, it is merely a probability textbook with a little more detail than the one we're using in class; it isn't geared towards music.
I do think of it as overkill for synthesis purposes, but people use Csound for lots of other purposes. I guess for algorithmic composition that kind of specificity is indispensible.
I'd argue for its audio precision, but then it's not realtime (by design) in the same way that Pd is. Not sure what control stuff you could do in csound that you couldn't in Pd (?) Never really loved the score<->orchestra dichotomy either, without that wall to negotiate I think you have more freedom in instrument design and in generation.
I love Csound for a bunch of reasons. The score format is definitely not one of them. The csoundapi~ Pd object is awesome, though, and now supports multiple instances. At the moment, I'm working with a 4-movement "microtonal" sonata I wrote with my Pd JIsequencer and translated to a Csound score. I find it much easier to control synthesis and production with Csound. I think just because it has higher-level stuff. It's also older and has more contributors. But I bet for most people the bottom line is whether they prefer to work with text or graphics. I like both. I'm not sure why, but it seems like the Csound and Pd camps are almost mutually exclusive.
-Chuckk
Would you please be willing to share some examples of using the CSound external with Pd? I have it, but have not really done much with it.
~Kyle
On 3/16/07, Chuckk Hubbard badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/17/07, padawan12 padawan12@obiwannabe.co.uk wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007 14:06:37 -0400 "Chuckk Hubbard" badmuthahubbard@gmail.com wrote:
What what was? The Csound opcode?
No the book on stats for music applications.
Alas, it is merely a probability textbook with a little more detail than the one we're using in class; it isn't geared towards music.
I do think of it as overkill for synthesis purposes, but people use Csound for lots of other purposes. I guess for algorithmic composition that kind of specificity is indispensible.
I'd argue for its audio precision, but then it's not realtime (by design) in the same way that Pd is. Not sure what control stuff you could do in csound that you couldn't in Pd (?) Never really loved the score<->orchestra dichotomy either, without that wall to negotiate I think you have more freedom in instrument design and in generation.
I love Csound for a bunch of reasons. The score format is definitely not one of them. The csoundapi~ Pd object is awesome, though, and now supports multiple instances. At the moment, I'm working with a 4-movement "microtonal" sonata I wrote with my Pd JIsequencer and translated to a Csound score. I find it much easier to control synthesis and production with Csound. I think just because it has higher-level stuff. It's also older and has more contributors. But I bet for most people the bottom line is whether they prefer to work with text or graphics. I like both. I'm not sure why, but it seems like the Csound and Pd camps are almost mutually exclusive.
-Chuckk
-- http://www.badmuthahubbard.com
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
I'm always embarrassed to share my patches, as I'm not much of a programmer and they tend to be really haphazard. So far I've mostly used it to get a feel for Csound opcodes, and of course to have better GUI control. I have one for grain3 and one for testing different filter opcodes.
Careful with the filter tester. For some reason the output of "reson" is like ten thousand times as high as any of the others. Like I said, you can now run sound from multiple instances, so csoundapi~ objects can feed into each other, if you have some reason to do that... At any rate, it beats having one csoundapi~ object and having everything send to the same subpatch to process.
-Chuckk
On 3/16/07, Kyle Klipowicz kyleklip@gmail.com wrote:
Would you please be willing to share some examples of using the CSound external with Pd? I have it, but have not really done much with it.
~Kyle
hard off wrote:
have you made a good oldschool pd synth? anything i make sounds like some roland groovebox from the 90's.
anyone got any cool old rave sounds?
After all this discussion about hard bass synths, I've made an abstraction with four pulse synth. Pulsewidth modulation can be done via the right inlet, e.g. applying
[osc~ 0.2] | [avg~] | [abs]
to it.
You'll need [>~] from Zexy plus [eadsr~] and [svf~] externals. You can also hear the synth in use: http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/misc/residuum-in_the_swamp.ogg
cu Thomas
"Prisons are needed only to provide the illusion that courts and police are effective. They're a kind of job insurance." (Leto II. in: Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune) http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/
#N canvas 545 280 496 600 10; #X obj 33 -17 inlet; #X obj 134 -23 inlet; #X obj 253 -18 inlet; #X obj 308 -18 inlet; #X obj 359 -17 inlet; #X obj 187 458 outlet~; #X text 33 -36 freq; #X text 133 -38 vel; #X text 248 -35 cutoff; #X text 312 -38 res; #X text 355 -38 pulsewidth; #X obj 123 294 svf~ low; #X obj 50 190 +~; #X obj 210 203 +~; #X obj 181 164 *~ 0.5; #X obj 263 168 *~ 0.3; #X obj 122 226 +~; #X obj 95 160 *~ 0.5; #X obj 8 139 pulsewidth~; #X obj 185 373 *~; #X obj 186 422 *~; #X obj 200 293 eadsr~ 20 220 0.5 180; #X obj 179 9 sel 0; #X obj 374 294 / 127; #X msg 183 41 0; #X obj 81 97 * 0.97; #X obj 163 100 * 1.02; #X obj 226 97 * 1.11; #X obj 94 136 pulsewidth~; #X obj 180 136 pulsewidth~; #X obj 265 137 pulsewidth~; #X obj 411 31 loadbang; #X msg 410 70 0.5; #X connect 0 0 18 0; #X connect 0 0 25 0; #X connect 0 0 26 0; #X connect 0 0 27 0; #X connect 1 0 22 0; #X connect 1 0 21 0; #X connect 2 0 11 1; #X connect 3 0 11 2; #X connect 4 0 18 1; #X connect 4 0 28 1; #X connect 4 0 29 1; #X connect 4 0 30 1; #X connect 11 0 19 0; #X connect 12 0 16 0; #X connect 13 0 16 1; #X connect 14 0 13 0; #X connect 15 0 13 1; #X connect 16 0 11 0; #X connect 17 0 12 1; #X connect 18 0 12 0; #X connect 19 0 20 0; #X connect 20 0 5 0; #X connect 21 0 19 1; #X connect 22 1 23 0; #X connect 22 1 24 0; #X connect 23 0 20 1; #X connect 24 0 18 2; #X connect 24 0 28 2; #X connect 24 0 29 2; #X connect 24 0 30 2; #X connect 25 0 28 0; #X connect 26 0 29 0; #X connect 27 0 30 0; #X connect 28 0 17 0; #X connect 29 0 14 0; #X connect 30 0 15 0; #X connect 31 0 32 0; #X connect 32 0 18 1; #X connect 32 0 28 1; #X connect 32 0 29 1; #X connect 32 0 30 1;
#N canvas 202 290 450 401 10; #X obj 65 33 inlet; #X obj 127 36 inlet; #X obj 181 37 inlet; #X text 62 14 freq; #X text 109 13 pulsewidth; #X text 185 15 reset; #X obj 67 160 hip~ 5; #X obj 67 188 outlet~; #X obj 66 100 >~ $2; #X obj 65 70 phasor~ $1; #X obj 67 130 -~; #X obj 151 94 expr 1 - $2; #X connect 0 0 9 0; #X connect 1 0 8 1; #X connect 1 0 11 0; #X connect 2 0 9 1; #X connect 6 0 7 0; #X connect 8 0 10 0; #X connect 9 0 8 0; #X connect 10 0 6 0; #X connect 11 0 10 1;
very diverse sound! i would be also very interested in the (are they 909?) kick and the clap. have you done them in pd?
roman
On Mon, 2007-03-26 at 17:37 +0200, Thomas Mayer wrote:
hard off wrote:
have you made a good oldschool pd synth? anything i make sounds like some roland groovebox from the 90's.
anyone got any cool old rave sounds?
After all this discussion about hard bass synths, I've made an abstraction with four pulse synth. Pulsewidth modulation can be done via the right inlet, e.g. applying
[osc~ 0.2] | [avg~] | [abs]
to it.
You'll need [>~] from Zexy plus [eadsr~] and [svf~] externals. You can also hear the synth in use: http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/misc/residuum-in_the_swamp.ogg
cu Thomas plain text document attachment (hoover~.pd) #N canvas 545 280 496 600 10; #X obj 33 -17 inlet; #X obj 134 -23 inlet; #X obj 253 -18 inlet; #X obj 308 -18 inlet; #X obj 359 -17 inlet; #X obj 187 458 outlet~; #X text 33 -36 freq; #X text 133 -38 vel; #X text 248 -35 cutoff; #X text 312 -38 res; #X text 355 -38 pulsewidth; #X obj 123 294 svf~ low; #X obj 50 190 +~; #X obj 210 203 +~; #X obj 181 164 *~ 0.5; #X obj 263 168 *~ 0.3; #X obj 122 226 +~; #X obj 95 160 *~ 0.5; #X obj 8 139 pulsewidth~; #X obj 185 373 *~; #X obj 186 422 *~; #X obj 200 293 eadsr~ 20 220 0.5 180; #X obj 179 9 sel 0; #X obj 374 294 / 127; #X msg 183 41 0; #X obj 81 97 * 0.97; #X obj 163 100 * 1.02; #X obj 226 97 * 1.11; #X obj 94 136 pulsewidth~; #X obj 180 136 pulsewidth~; #X obj 265 137 pulsewidth~; #X obj 411 31 loadbang; #X msg 410 70 0.5; #X connect 0 0 18 0; #X connect 0 0 25 0; #X connect 0 0 26 0; #X connect 0 0 27 0; #X connect 1 0 22 0; #X connect 1 0 21 0; #X connect 2 0 11 1; #X connect 3 0 11 2; #X connect 4 0 18 1; #X connect 4 0 28 1; #X connect 4 0 29 1; #X connect 4 0 30 1; #X connect 11 0 19 0; #X connect 12 0 16 0; #X connect 13 0 16 1; #X connect 14 0 13 0; #X connect 15 0 13 1; #X connect 16 0 11 0; #X connect 17 0 12 1; #X connect 18 0 12 0; #X connect 19 0 20 0; #X connect 20 0 5 0; #X connect 21 0 19 1; #X connect 22 1 23 0; #X connect 22 1 24 0; #X connect 23 0 20 1; #X connect 24 0 18 2; #X connect 24 0 28 2; #X connect 24 0 29 2; #X connect 24 0 30 2; #X connect 25 0 28 0; #X connect 26 0 29 0; #X connect 27 0 30 0; #X connect 28 0 17 0; #X connect 29 0 14 0; #X connect 30 0 15 0; #X connect 31 0 32 0; #X connect 32 0 18 1; #X connect 32 0 28 1; #X connect 32 0 29 1; #X connect 32 0 30 1; plain text document attachment (pulsewidth~.pd) #N canvas 202 290 450 401 10; #X obj 65 33 inlet; #X obj 127 36 inlet; #X obj 181 37 inlet; #X text 62 14 freq; #X text 109 13 pulsewidth; #X text 185 15 reset; #X obj 67 160 hip~ 5; #X obj 67 188 outlet~; #X obj 66 100 >~ $2; #X obj 65 70 phasor~ $1; #X obj 67 130 -~; #X obj 151 94 expr 1 - $2; #X connect 0 0 9 0; #X connect 1 0 8 1; #X connect 1 0 11 0; #X connect 2 0 9 1; #X connect 6 0 7 0; #X connect 8 0 10 0; #X connect 9 0 8 0; #X connect 10 0 6 0; #X connect 11 0 10 1; _______________________________________________ PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
Roman Haefeli wrote:
very diverse sound! i would be also very interested in the (are they 909?) kick and the clap. have you done them in pd?
No, these are made with the 909 drumset of Hydrogen, triggered by Pd. The remaining sound is a sample of Muddy Waters with some distortion made in Pd. The track is not yet finished, the mixing needs some more attention, so I just wanted to show off. *putting my shirt on again*
cu Thomas
"Prisons are needed only to provide the illusion that courts and police are effective. They're a kind of job insurance." (Leto II. in: Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune) http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/
Various versions of Extended on OS X, and AFAIK all PD versions on Windows, have trouble with the [>~] object.
It can be replaced with:
[expr~ $v1 > $v2]
if there are two audio signals to be compared (as in a Pulse Width Modulation application of this), or:
[expr~ $v1 > 1]
in the case you are simply converting a phasor~ to a balanced square wave.
best, d.
Thomas Mayer wrote:
You'll need [>~] from Zexy plus [eadsr~] and [svf~] externals. You can also hear the synth in use: http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/misc/residuum-in_the_swamp.ogg
Derek Holzer wrote:
[expr~ $v1 > 1]
in the case you are simply converting a phasor~ to a balanced square wave.
Sorry, that should be:
[expr~ $v1 > 0.5]
no?
d.
Cool, that's an efficient PWM osc. It has a clean sound, more prophet than juno. What is svf~?
best, Andy
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:37:25 +0200 Thomas Mayer thomas@dergrossebruder.org wrote:
hard off wrote:
have you made a good oldschool pd synth? anything i make sounds like some roland groovebox from the 90's.
anyone got any cool old rave sounds?
After all this discussion about hard bass synths, I've made an abstraction with four pulse synth. Pulsewidth modulation can be done via the right inlet, e.g. applying
[osc~ 0.2] | [avg~] | [abs]
to it.
You'll need [>~] from Zexy plus [eadsr~] and [svf~] externals. You can also hear the synth in use: http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/misc/residuum-in_the_swamp.ogg
cu Thomas
"Prisons are needed only to provide the illusion that courts and police are effective. They're a kind of job insurance." (Leto II. in: Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune) http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/
padawan12 wrote:
Cool, that's an efficient PWM osc. It has a clean sound, more prophet than juno. What is svf~?
svf~ is a state variable filter with a great implementation of resonance IMHO.
cu Thomas
"Prisons are needed only to provide the illusion that courts and police are effective. They're a kind of job insurance." (Leto II. in: Frank Herbert, God Emperor of Dune) http://thomas.dergrossebruder.org/
Hallo, Thomas Mayer hat gesagt: // Thomas Mayer wrote:
padawan12 wrote:
Cool, that's an efficient PWM osc. It has a clean sound, more prophet than juno. What is svf~?
svf~ is a state variable filter with a great implementation of resonance IMHO.
There are different versions, though. I know of at least two [svf~]s.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__
-
Chuckk Hubbard -
Derek Holzer -
Frank Barknecht -
hard off -
Josh Steiner -
Kyle Klipowicz -
Michal Seta -
mik -
padawan12 -
Roman Haefeli -
shift8 -
Steffen -
Thomas Jeppesen -
Thomas Mayer