lukhasj

Im trying to get a function to fill a buffer, but im unable to get 100% accurate results. 

Im trying to get a function to fill a buffer, but im unable to get 100% accurate results. 
Wich is absolutely critical to my patch.
can anyone help??.. im lost.


100-accurate

Nothing about what kind of platform you're on, what version of the objects you're running, and *nothing* whatsoever in the way of a patch that one could use to make sense of what you're asking? You'd better hope that those few Max list readers who are clairvoyant are reading, I guess....

More background and examples will get you better answers. Always. Want to try again?

With 100% acurracy, as in the buffer is filled with a perfect loopable content, thus mapped over perfect (buffer length).

its pretty easy..
In tring to get a "Function" object.
To fill a "buffer".
With 100% acurracy, as in the buffer is filled with a perfect loopable content, thus mapped over perfect (buffer length).


my question to you, is, which person on this planet did you expect to understand your question?

> With 100% acurracy, as in the buffer is filled with a perfect loopable content, thus mapped over perfect (buffer length).

Perhaps if you showed us your patch as it is....

> its pretty easy..
> In tring to get a "Function" object.
> To fill a "buffer".
> With 100% acurracy, as in the buffer is filled with a perfect loopable content, thus mapped over perfect (buffer length). 

Perhaps if you showed us your patch as it is....


i have to go out right now, but a good tip i can give you is to use the right and middle outlets of uzi.

haha. yes it`s a strip rebuild kinda thing:) thx didnt notice the detour.

I don't see any accuracy problem. I just simplified the patch, 

counter is really not required (uzi counts too). If you have 4.5.7 

you can add the second argument to start counting from 0 directly).

I don't see any accuracy problem. I just simplified the patch,  
counter is really not required (uzi counts too). If you have 4.5.7  
you can add the second argument to start counting from 0 directly).

its a buffer~ for a wave~ object intended to loop.

Im haveing troube with the end result not being a 1:1 copy 

and a minor difference in loopability is preceived useing this patch. (it clicks for short)

lol, If u see the 2nd version patch.
its a buffer~ for a wave~ object intended to loop.
Im haveing troube with the end result not being a 1:1 copy 
of the wave shape presented graphically.
and a minor difference in loopability is preceived useing this patch. (it clicks for short)


I`ll give it a try, looks better with the trigger, 

I`ll give it a try, looks better with the trigger,  
thx


.. I get a nice sawtooth sound. Not an anti-aliased sawtooth of course.

Quote: lukhasj wrote on Sat, 07 April 2007 16:54

----------------------------------------------------

> its a buffer~ for a wave~ object intended to loop.

> Im haveing troube with the end result not being a 1:1 copy 

> of the wave shape presented graphically.

> and a minor difference in loopability is preceived useing this patch. (it clicks for short)

Quote: lukhasj wrote on Sat, 07 April 2007 16:54
----------------------------------------------------
> lol, If u see the 2nd version patch.
> its a buffer~ for a wave~ object intended to loop.
> Im haveing troube with the end result not being a 1:1 copy 
> of the wave shape presented graphically.
> and a minor difference in loopability is preceived useing this patch. (it clicks for short)
>
----------------------------------------------------


Quote: Mattijs wrote on Sat, 07 April 2007 17:07

Quote: Mattijs wrote on Sat, 07 April 2007 17:07
----------------------------------------------------
> If I try this in your patch.. 


> you can add the second argument to start counting from 0 directly.

Excellent, I hadn't realized that uzi new feature!

> If you have 4.5.7
> you can add the second argument to start counting from 0 directly.
>
Excellent, I hadn't realized that uzi new feature!
JF.

its not fast enough for what im doing with it.

what, zigzag~? 1/sample rate is too slow to trigger?

it's an object i just discovered and it's my favorite new find.

> its not fast enough for what im doing with it.

what, zigzag~?  1/sample rate is too slow to trigger?

>
> its not fast enough for what im doing with it.
>


1/"control rate"
this object can bitshape.


fair enough.
what are you trying to do anyway?


Avoiding to have to use overdive @ 96khz samplerate asio, with 96khz substructure.

It`s a (put in send and receive patcher) way to bypass the use of a line~ using a wave and phasor~ design.

It`s sharp and nippy not held back by data limitting, at the cost of processor power.

It`s one of my flaws to do this, but who cares these days??

Avoiding to have to use overdive @ 96khz samplerate asio, with 96khz substructure.
It`s a (put in send and receive patcher) way to bypass the use of a line~ using a wave and phasor~ design.

It`s sharp and nippy not held back by data limitting, at the cost of processor power.
It`s one of my flaws to do this, but who cares these days??
