Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score

Date	2011-04-20 00:36
From	"Partev Barr Sarkissian"
Subject	Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score
	Good point. -pbs --- noisesmith@gmail.com wrote: From: Justin Glenn Smith To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk Subject: Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:35:51 -0700 Nil Geisweiller wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Justin Glenn Smith > wrote: >> >> >> Nil Geisweiller wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Justin Smith wrote: >>>> Yeah, that would do it. Though converting to a string and then immediately >>>> back again is often intuitive, it is a pet peeve of mine. The following will >>>> do the same thing, but with fewer lines of code, an order of magnitude fewer >>>> CPU cycles and no dynamic memory allocation needed: >>>> >>>> ioct = int(rnd(12-3)+3) >>>> ipch = int(rnd 11)/100 >>>> icps = cpspch(ioct+ipch) >>> I believe the following would work too (though I haven't tried) >>> >>> icps = cpspch(3+int(rnd(100))/100) >>> >> for cpspch you want fractional parts that are members of the set [.0 .01 .02. .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .1 .11] >> that us the purpose of ipch = int(rnd 11)/100 >> >> any fractional part that is not a member of that set should not be valid input for cpspch >> >> your code gives fractional parts in the set [.0 .01 .02 .03 ... .97 .98 .99] > > I tried, it does work, but I suppose that might be a side effect of > the way cpspch is implemented rather than an intended feature (I find > it reasonable though). > Well I wasn't sure, but in my defense I did say that it "shouldn't" work, not that it wouldn't :) Based on some experimentation (see the csd below) n.24 is one octave higher than n.12, and n.36 is two octaves higher, etc. So the problem here is that your output frequencies would be about 9 octaves too higher than you expect for any given input. sr = 44100 ksmps = 32 nchnls = 1 instr 1 ipch = cpspch(p4) printf_i "%g %g\n", 1, p4, ipch endin i 1 0 0 1.0 i 1 0 0 1.12 i 1 0 0 1.24 i 1 0 0 1.36 i 1 0 0 1.99 Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound" _____________________________________________________________ Netscape. Just the Net You Need. Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Date	2011-04-20 02:49
From	Adam Puckett
Subject	Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score
	Justin, Nil's code could be used as a hack to linearly interpolate from .11 to .12, but I don't think he wants to do that. On 4/19/11, Partev Barr Sarkissian wrote: > Good point. > > -pbs > > --- noisesmith@gmail.com wrote: > > From: Justin Glenn Smith > To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk > Subject: Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:35:51 -0700 > > Nil Geisweiller wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:40 PM, Justin Glenn Smith >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Nil Geisweiller wrote: >>>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Justin Smith >>>> wrote: >>>>> Yeah, that would do it. Though converting to a string and then >>>>> immediately >>>>> back again is often intuitive, it is a pet peeve of mine. The following >>>>> will >>>>> do the same thing, but with fewer lines of code, an order of magnitude >>>>> fewer >>>>> CPU cycles and no dynamic memory allocation needed: >>>>> >>>>> ioct = int(rnd(12-3)+3) >>>>> ipch = int(rnd 11)/100 >>>>> icps = cpspch(ioct+ipch) >>>> I believe the following would work too (though I haven't tried) >>>> >>>> icps = cpspch(3+int(rnd(100))/100) >>>> >>> for cpspch you want fractional parts that are members of the set [.0 .01 >>> .02. .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 .1 .11] >>> that us the purpose of ipch = int(rnd 11)/100 >>> >>> any fractional part that is not a member of that set should not be valid >>> input for cpspch >>> >>> your code gives fractional parts in the set [.0 .01 .02 .03 ... .97 .98 >>> .99] >> >> I tried, it does work, but I suppose that might be a side effect of >> the way cpspch is implemented rather than an intended feature (I find >> it reasonable though). >> > > Well I wasn't sure, but in my defense I did say that it "shouldn't" work, > not that it wouldn't :) > > Based on some experimentation (see the csd below) n.24 is one octave higher > than n.12, and n.36 is two octaves higher, etc. So the problem here is that > your output frequencies would be about 9 octaves too higher than you expect > for any given input. > > > > > > sr = 44100 > ksmps = 32 > nchnls = 1 > > > > instr 1 > ipch = cpspch(p4) > printf_i "%g %g\n", 1, p4, ipch > endin > > > > > i 1 0 0 1.0 > i 1 0 0 1.12 > i 1 0 0 1.24 > i 1 0 0 1.36 > i 1 0 0 1.99 > > > > > > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 > Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe > csound" > > > > > > _____________________________________________________________ > Netscape. Just the Net You Need. > > > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker > https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 > Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here > To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe > csound" > > Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Date	2011-04-20 03:29
From	Justin Glenn Smith
Subject	Re: [Csnd] Using user defined operators in score
	I don't understand what you are saying here. Adam Puckett wrote: > Justin, > > Nil's code could be used as a hack to linearly interpolate from .11 to > .12, but I don't think he wants to do that. ... >>>>> icps = cpspch(3+int(rnd(100))/100) that doesn't interpolate between .11 and .12 in any sense I can see - or is that code even what you are talking about? Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599 Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"