"And one cannot change existing opcodes as it runs the danger of breaking
existing music" - Okay, assume that's a given.

Could you simply take "ampdb" and have that as a starting point,
something like;

asig1  (whatever opcode)  whatever parameters    <= declared
againstage  ampdb   asig1*(and its parameters)   <= declared
iamp   =  againstage*(some factor or coefficient)<= adjusted amplitude
asig2  =  iamp                                   <= new adjusted signal

... and adjust it to where you want it. Is that do'able?

-Partev


=============================================================================
=============================================================================


--- jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk wrote:

From: jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk
To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: dynamic range
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:12:04 -0000 (UTC)

And one cannot change existing opcodes as it runs the danger of breaking
existing music.

> Why? That does not make any sense to me.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Federico Vanni" 
> To: 
> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 2:57 PM
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: dynamic range
>
>
>> ok Alan, thanks...
>> so why we don't change the 'ampdb' opcode using
>> a maximum dB value of 96???
>> it should be more accurate teorically...
>> best
>> fv




Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"




_____________________________________________________________
Netscape.  Just the Net You Need.

Why not assume that ampdb is deprecated and inaccurate for historical  
reasons, and use ampdbfs instead?  This seems like a solution that  
doesn't require any additional labor or argument;  nor does it run the  
risk of violating backward compatibility.

In other words: why not use the elegant solution already in place?


JP




On Jan 5, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Partev Barr Sarkissian wrote:

> "And one cannot change existing opcodes as it runs the danger of  
> breaking
> existing music" - Okay, assume that's a given.
>
> Could you simply take "ampdb" and have that as a starting point,
> something like;
>
> asig1  (whatever opcode)  whatever parameters    <= declared
> againstage  ampdb   asig1*(and its parameters)   <= declared
> iamp   =  againstage*(some factor or coefficient)<= adjusted amplitude
> asig2  =  iamp                                   <= new adjusted  
> signal
>
> ... and adjust it to where you want it. Is that do'able?
>
> -Partev
>
>
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> = 
> ======================================================================
>
>
> --- jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk wrote:
>
> From: jpff@cs.bath.ac.uk
> To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: dynamic range
> Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 16:12:04 -0000 (UTC)
>
> And one cannot change existing opcodes as it runs the danger of  
> breaking
> existing music.
>
>> Why? That does not make any sense to me.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Federico Vanni" 
>> To: 
>> Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2008 2:57 PM
>> Subject: [Csnd] Re: Re: Re: Re: dynamic range
>>
>>
>>> ok Alan, thanks...
>>> so why we don't change the 'ampdb' opcode using
>>> a maximum dB value of 96???
>>> it should be more accurate teorically...
>>> best
>>> fv
>
>
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________
> Netscape.  Just the Net You Need.
>
>
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body  
> "unsubscribe csound"