There is a remnant in the pitch opcode, which I think could be removed
as it never worked very well.  It was a transcription of calls to
octdown and noctdft which were supposed to act as a pitch detector.
Either it was iffy, or more likely I coded it wrong.  The pitchamf
opcode is much more robust.  I wonder if anyone used pitch?

PS: I have committed new code for a metallic bar opcode.  This is
unfinished and undocumented.  More on this later.
==John ffitch


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

I am still sorting that out -- just sent a message about that one minute 
ago.  I committed it as the safest way to transfer from the x86_64 to the 
i686 machine.  I am also considering a change to teh parameters and way it 
handles multiple strikes, and also needs documentation.  The sound is 
ratehr nice.
  It is the first of what I hope will be a family.  These are not 
waveguide models but solving of teh PDE via finite differences.  The 
original was in Mathlab, but the C is betwen 50 and 100 times faster, as 
well as smaller.  I hope to give parameter details later, possibly today.

==John



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Csound-devel mailing list
Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

I've used the pitch opcode,
I experimented a lot back and forth between using pitchamf and pitch.
The purpose at that time was to make an adaptive filter,
like a feedback eliminator, but slow so that some feedback would be allowed through.
I used a combination of pitch and pareq to do this,
splitting the input into separate frequency bands and the letting a pitch/pareq pair work on each band.

I do not remember exactly why pitch worked better that pitchamf,
but I do remember that pitch was always a little bit out of tune (a little low).
To get the (approx) correct cps I did:
koct, kamp 	pitch a1, iupdte, ilo, ihi, idbthresh 
kcps		= cpsoct(koct) * 1.06

best
Oeyvind




> From: jpff@codemist.co.uk
> Sent: 2006-03-07 09:18:47 CET
> To: csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: [Cs-dev] More on d-type
> 
> There is a remnant in the pitch opcode, which I think could be removed
> as it never worked very well.  It was a transcription of calls to
> octdown and noctdft which were supposed to act as a pitch detector.
> Either it was iffy, or more likely I coded it wrong.  The pitchamf
> opcode is much more robust.  I wonder if anyone used pitch?
> 
> PS: I have committed new code for a metallic bar opcode.  This is
> unfinished and undocumented.  More on this later.
> ==John ffitch
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
> that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
> and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Csound-devel mailing list
> Csound-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/csound-devel
>