dust docs maybe mistake
Date | 2017-03-16 13:09 |
From | Anton Kholomiov |
Subject | dust docs maybe mistake |
The docs says
Csound mailing list
Csound@listserv.heanet.ie
https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND
Send bugs reports to
https://github.com/csound/csound/issues
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
Generates random impulses from 0 to 1. kres dust kamp, kdensity But when I try it. It seems that the kdensity is a number |
Date | 2017-03-16 15:21 |
From | jpff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Looks like per second when I run the manual example On Thu, 16 Mar 2017, Anton Kholomiov wrote: > The docs says > > Generates random impulses from 0 to 1. > > kres dust kamp, kdensity > kdensity -- average number of impulses per second. > > > But when I try it. It seems that the kdensity is a number > of impulses per minute. It generates impulses at much slower > rate than expected. > Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie > https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to > https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can > be posted here > Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here |
Date | 2017-03-17 06:04 |
From | Anton Kholomiov |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Attachments | dust.csd |
Can you try out my example? It uses dust as trigger for events. I use two lines to compare the rate of events:line 23 ; ktrig metro 2 24 ktrig dust 1, 2 My guess that the rate of events should be the same (2 per second) 2017-03-16 18:21 GMT+03:00 jpff <jpff@codemist.co.uk>: Looks like per second when I run the manual example |
Date | 2017-03-17 16:15 |
From | jpff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
therate depends on kr as well. Your example generates 15 events in 100 Change ksmps to 1 and you get 400 in 100s, about 32 ties more. So the manual is incorrect as it stands but the truth is complex. Will try to undestand the code ==John On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Anton Kholomiov wrote: > Can you try out my example? It uses dust as trigger for events. > I use two lines to compare the rate of events: > > line > 23 ; ktrig metro 2 > 24 ktrig dust 1, 2 > > We can comment one or another to compare the rates. > My guess that the rate of events should be the same (2 per second) > but in the dust case the events should happen not so evenly and out of tempo. > But we can hear it's not the happening. The `dust` case produces much less > evenets. > > 2017-03-16 18:21 GMT+03:00 jpff |
Date | 2017-03-17 16:31 |
From | jpff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Experiment suggest that te desity is per second per call in krate or per sample at a ate. Not sue how to ecod tis! On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, jpff wrote: > therate depends on kr as well. Your example generates 15 events in 100 > Change ksmps to 1 and you get 400 in 100s, about 32 ties more. So the manual > is incorrect as it stands but the truth is complex. Will try to undestand > the code > ==John > > On Fri, 17 Mar 2017, Anton Kholomiov wrote: > >> Can you try out my example? It uses dust as trigger for events. >> I use two lines to compare the rate of events: >> >> line >> 23 ; ktrig metro 2 >> 24 ktrig dust 1, 2 >> >> We can comment one or another to compare the rates. >> My guess that the rate of events should be the same (2 per second) >> but in the dust case the events should happen not so evenly and out of >> tempo. >> But we can hear it's not the happening. The `dust` case produces much less >> evenets. >> >> 2017-03-16 18:21 GMT+03:00 jpff |
Date | 2017-03-18 07:31 |
From | Anton Kholomiov |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
So for k-rate case the rate have to be scaled by ksmps ? 2017-03-17 19:31 GMT+03:00 jpff <jpff@codemist.co.uk>: Experiment suggest that te desity is per second per call in krate or per sample at a ate. Not sue how to ecod tis! |
Date | 2017-03-18 07:31 |
From | Anton Kholomiov |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
by rate I mean density of dust 2017-03-18 10:31 GMT+03:00 Anton Kholomiov <anton.kholomiov@gmail.com>:
|
Date | 2017-03-18 12:30 |
From | John ff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Yes, but it is too late to change the code. I tried to change the documentation.
Sent from TypeApp
On 18 Mar 2017, at 07:32, Anton Kholomiov <anton.kholomiov@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
|
Date | 2017-03-18 13:12 |
From | Victor Lazzarini |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
maybe not too late, we have not released it yet.
Victor Lazzarini Dean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy
Maynooth University
Ireland
|
Date | 2017-03-18 16:33 |
From | jpff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
It has been in csound sice 2012 so rathe late..... On Sat, 18 Mar 2017, Victor Lazzarini wrote: > maybe not too late, we have not released it yet. > > Victor Lazzarini Dean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy > Maynooth University > Ireland > > On 18 Mar 2017, at 12:31, John ff |
Date | 2017-03-18 19:57 |
From | Steven Yi |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
This seems a pretty big bug though, one that would have come up sooner if this was being used by a larger part of the community. I'm assuming it is not used much and could be a candidate to update, even at the expense of breaking backwards compatibility. It seems better to me than the alternative to move forward and have an awkward note in the manual. On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 12:33 PM, jpff |
Date | 2017-03-18 21:18 |
From | "Dr. Richard Boulanger" |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
You should correct this bug. I do use dust, but I would adjust Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 18, 2017, at 3:57 PM, Steven Yi |
Date | 2017-03-18 21:20 |
From | Michael Gogins |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
We must preserve backwards compatibility. We could do a dust2 that behaves as you wish. Best, Mike On Mar 19, 2017 8:18 AM, "Dr. Richard Boulanger" <rboulanger@berklee.edu> wrote: You should correct this bug. I do use dust, but I would adjust |
Date | 2017-03-18 21:50 |
From | Steven Yi |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
There already is a dust2: http://csound.github.io/docs/manual/dust2.html These follow the design of Dust/Dust2 UGens from SC3. However, from what I can ascertain in looking at SC3's code, the Dust and Dust2 code depends upon mSampleDur, which looks to be set differently for 'audio' and 'control' rate when a UGen is setup from the SC class (affected by SC_World's Rate_Init()). The C++ code for Dust2 then works for both rates because that mSampleDur changes. I think what happened is that when the Csound versions were implemented, the code may have been a somewhat literal translation from the SC3 code, without realization that mSampleDur would be different at control rate in SC3. That would hint at a bug then in initial translation to Csound's conventions, and it would also explain why dust/dust2 should work correctly at a-rate but not k-rate. I would imagine it was the intention to match the implementation of SC3 and accordingly this should be corrected. On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Michael Gogins |
Date | 2017-03-19 00:58 |
From | "Dr. Richard Boulanger" |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Dust3 Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 18, 2017, at 5:50 PM, Steven Yi |
Date | 2017-03-19 15:11 |
From | John ff |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
How to proceed? Would anyone object if this were changed to coincide with SC?
Sent from TypeApp
On 18 Mar 2017, at 21:51, Steven Yi <stevenyi@GMAIL.COM> wrote: There already is a dust2: |
Date | 2017-03-19 15:51 |
From | Oeyvind Brandtsegg |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
I think that sounds like a good solution 19. mar. 2017 8.12 a.m. skrev "John ff" <jpff@codemist.co.uk>:
|
Date | 2017-03-19 16:48 |
From | Victor Lazzarini |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
I think so. ======================== Prof. Victor Lazzarini Dean of Arts, Celtic Studies, and Philosophy, Maynooth University, Maynooth, Co Kildare, Ireland Tel: 00 353 7086936 Fax: 00 353 1 7086952 > On 19 Mar 2017, at 15:51, Oeyvind Brandtsegg |
Date | 2017-03-19 17:03 |
From | Steven Yi |
Subject | Re: dust docs maybe mistake |
Yes, please do just change dust/dust2. On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Victor Lazzarini |
Date | 2017-03-19 20:15 |
From | jpff |
Subject | dust docs correct; code changed |
WARNING!! i have changed dust and dust2 in k-rate version to agree with the documentation, and added a note in the manual. So if you use dust or dust2 at k-rate please be aware of the bug fix from git or next release. Apologies for this incompatible change but as the opcode is a copy of a SuperCollider one it seems right to make the change ==John ff Csound mailing list Csound@listserv.heanet.ie https://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A0=CSOUND Send bugs reports to https://github.com/csound/csound/issues Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here |
Date | 2017-03-20 05:41 |
From | Anton Kholomiov |
Subject | Re: dust docs correct; code changed |
Thanks, John! 2017-03-19 23:15 GMT+03:00 jpff <jpff@codemist.co.uk>: WARNING!! i have changed dust and dust2 in k-rate version to agree with the documentation, and added a note in the manual. |