lewis lepton

got a quick question to ask about [play~].

i am looking at building some new patches and trying to do less arguments, and was looking at having play have arguments relating to [poly~] arguments.

you know that you can create an embedded patcher or even a abstraction, and residing in that you can have various objects that have the replaceable argument of #1/#2/#3 etc which you can replace with values.

cant this be done with [play~] or [groove~] or any other file processing object?

i have a small patch to show what i mean with [cycle~] and [play~], but changing the [cycle~] name deos work, but not [play~]. how could i do this?

got a quick question to ask about [play~].
i am looking at building some new patches and trying to do less arguments, and was looking at having play have arguments relating to [poly~] arguments.

you know that you can create an embedded patcher or even a abstraction, and residing in that you can have various objects that have the replaceable argument of #1/#2/#3 etc which you can replace with values.
cant this be done with [play~] or [groove~] or any other file processing object?

i have a small patch to show what i mean with [cycle~] and [play~], but changing the [cycle~]  name deos work, but not [play~]. how could i do this?

arguments-for-play

1. they have to be abstractions not subpatchers

2. yes, as long as those patchers in your subpatches examples are either abstractions or contained within an abstraction, that will work and is exactly how to do it.

1. they have to be abstractions not subpatchers
2. yes, as long as those patchers in your subpatches examples are either abstractions or contained within an abstraction, that will work and is exactly how to do it.


you might run into one of the few exceptions where an object wont take #1, but play~ isn´t one of them.

arguments for [play~]