[Csnd] pvslock
| Date | 2011-05-01 17:29 |
| From | peiman khosravi |
| Subject | [Csnd] pvslock |
Hello,
I am struggling to notice any difference between the locked and
non-locked modes of pvslock. And the manual example does not really
sound different to my ears without this opcode.
Also for improving transposed signals would this opcode be placed before
or after the transposition? (my guess is before.)
Thanks
Peiman
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 | 2011-05-01 17:37 |
| From | Iain McCurdy |
| Subject | RE: [Csnd] pvslock |
|
Hi Peiman, If you give atimpt a static value or a very slowly changing value you should be able to hear klock's effect more clearly. bye, Iain > Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 17:29:08 +0100 > From: peimankhosravi@gmail.com > To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk > Subject: [Csnd] pvslock > > Hello, > > I am struggling to notice any difference between the locked and > non-locked modes of pvslock. And the manual example does not really > sound different to my ears without this opcode. > > Also for improving transposed signals would this opcode be placed before > or after the transposition? (my guess is before.) > > Thanks > > Peiman > > > 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 | 2011-05-01 17:49 |
| From | peiman khosravi |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] pvslock |
|
Thanks Iain, I can't find the "atimpt" variable anywhere in the manual page. Do you mean mincer? Yes I can certainly hear the difference there, it's huge. But I was referring to the pvslock opcode. http://members.home.nl/mag.knevel/csound_betamanual/pvslock.html Best, Peiman On 01/05/2011 17:37, Iain McCurdy wrote: Hi Peiman, |
| Date | 2011-05-01 18:05 |
| From | Iain McCurdy |
| Subject | RE: [Csnd] pvslock |
|
Sorry Peiman, I was indeed getting my threads crossed and not paying attention! I haven't used pvslock yet. Iain Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 17:49:38 +0100 From: peimankhosravi@gmail.com To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk Subject: Re: [Csnd] pvslock Thanks Iain, I can't find the "atimpt" variable anywhere in the manual page. Do you mean mincer? Yes I can certainly hear the difference there, it's huge. But I was referring to the pvslock opcode. http://members.home.nl/mag.knevel/csound_betamanual/pvslock.html Best, Peiman On 01/05/2011 17:37, Iain McCurdy wrote: Hi Peiman, |
| Date | 2011-05-01 18:31 |
| From | Victor Lazzarini |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] pvslock |
| well, there is an improvement on timestretching, but it depends on the source and how badly "minced" it is. The idea is that pvsftanal + pvslock + pvsynth would try to approximate temposcal/mincer. It's still an experimental opcode. Victor On 1 May 2011, at 17:49, peiman khosravi wrote:
Dr Victor Lazzarini Senior Lecturer Dept. of Music NUI Maynooth Ireland tel.: +353 1 708 3545 Victor dot Lazzarini AT nuim dot ie |
| Date | 2011-05-01 18:50 |
| From | peiman khosravi |
| Subject | Re: [Csnd] pvslock |
|
Thanks Victor, yes I hear a very very slight improvement with extreme time-stretching. Best, Peiman On 01/05/2011 18:31, Victor Lazzarini wrote: well, there is an improvement on timestretching, but it depends on the source and how badly "minced" it is. The idea is that pvsftanal + pvslock + pvsynth would try to approximate temposcal/mincer. It's still an experimental opcode. |