i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..

is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??

i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..
is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??


endelss-resampling

by "track" you probably mean create new "buffer~" objects and by "resample" without creating new "tracks" you probably mean "overdub".

i may not be thinking comprehensively about this, but

instead of using record~(unless I'm mistaken and there's an overdub function for record~), you can use something like peek~, read from a buffer~ to write the pre-recorded material into another buffer~, then read from the second buffer~ while recording other data at the same time back into the first buffer~. This would only take two buffer~s instead of infinitely creating new ones but it is not instantaneous(at least not the way i'm describing it)like most overdub functions on recording devices.

but i'm sure there's other ways to do this, hopefully someone else will chime in with ideas. after all, Radial can handle this kind of thing pretty easily (last I heard).

by "track" you probably mean create new "buffer~" objects and by "resample" without creating new "tracks" you probably mean "overdub".
i may not be thinking comprehensively about this, but
instead of using record~(unless I'm mistaken and there's an overdub function for record~), you can use something like peek~, read from a buffer~ to write the pre-recorded material into another buffer~, then read from the second buffer~ while recording other data at the same time back into the first buffer~. This would only take two buffer~s instead of infinitely creating new ones but it is not instantaneous(at least not the way i'm describing it)like most overdub functions on recording devices.

but i'm sure there's other ways to do this, hopefully someone else will chime in with ideas. after all, Radial can handle this kind of thing pretty easily (last I heard).


Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,

but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for

'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just

discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record

with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,

> by "track" you probably mean create new "buffer~"

> objects and by "resample" without creating new

> i may not be thinking comprehensively about this,

> instead of using record~(unless I'm mistaken and

> there's an overdub function for record~), you can

> use something like peek~, read from a buffer~ to

> write the pre-recorded material into another

> buffer~, then read from the second buffer~ while

> recording other data at the same time back into the

> first buffer~. This would only take two buffer~s

> instead of infinitely creating new ones but it is

> not instantaneous(at least not the way i'm

> describing it)like most overdub functions on

> but i'm sure there's other ways to do this,

> hopefully someone else will chime in with ideas.

> after all, Radial can handle this kind of thing

Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,
but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for
'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just
discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record
with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,
cheers
Roger
--- raja  wrote:

>
> by "track" you probably mean create new "buffer~"
> objects and by "resample" without creating new
> "tracks" you probably mean "overdub".
> i may not be thinking comprehensively about this,
> but
> instead of using record~(unless I'm mistaken and
> there's an overdub function for record~), you can
> use something like peek~, read from a buffer~ to
> write the pre-recorded material into another
> buffer~, then read from the second buffer~ while
> recording other data at the same time back into the
> first buffer~. This would only take two buffer~s
> instead of infinitely creating new ones but it is
> not instantaneous(at least not the way i'm
> describing it)like most overdub functions on
> recording devices.
>
> but i'm sure there's other ways to do this,
> hopefully someone else will chime in with ideas.
> after all, Radial can handle this kind of thing
> pretty easily (last I heard).
>


I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5? Are you sure Roger?

At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:

>Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,

>but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for

>'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just

>discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record

>with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,

202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X / Major Malfunction

I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5?  Are you sure Roger?

At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:
>Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,
>but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for
>'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just
>discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record
>with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,
>cheers
>Roger

-- 
Dan Nigrin -  Defective Records
202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X / Major Malfunction
http://defectiverecords.com
http://jackosx.com


recordf~ is one of the PeRColate objects.

On 3-Sep-08, at 5:54 AM, Dan Nigrin wrote:

> I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5? Are you sure Roger?

> At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:

>> Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,

>> but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for

>> 'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just

>> discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record

>> with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,

> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X / Major Malfunction

> I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5?  Are you sure Roger?
>
> Dan
>
> At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:
>> Actually there isn't an overdub facility in record~,
>> but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search for
>> 'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just
>> discovered, there's a new recordf~ object ('record
>> with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,
>> cheers
>> Roger
>
> -- 
> Dan Nigrin -  Defective Records
> 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X / Major Malfunction
> http://defectiverecords.com
> http://jackosx.com
>


Ah, my apologies. That's the downside of accessing the

.help files via the file browser - no corporate

(Didn't the PerColate .help files use to have some

kind of logo or something, or am I thinking of another

> recordf~ is one of the PeRColate objects.

> On 3-Sep-08, at 5:54 AM, Dan Nigrin wrote:

> > I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5? Are you sure

> > At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:

> >> Actually there isn't an overdub facility in

> >> but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search

> >> 'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just

> >> discovered, there's a new recordf~ object

> >> with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,

> > 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X /

Ah, my apologies. That's the downside of accessing the
.help files via the file browser - no corporate
identifiers ;-)
 (Didn't the PerColate .help files use to have some
kind of logo or something, or am I thinking of another
library...?)
cheers
Roger

> recordf~ is one of the PeRColate objects.
>
> Brad
>
>
> On 3-Sep-08, at 5:54 AM, Dan Nigrin wrote:
>
> > I don't see a recordf~ in my Mac 5?  Are you sure
> Roger?
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > At 10:18 AM +0100 9/3/08, ROGER CARRUTHERS wrote:
> >> Actually there isn't an overdub facility in
> record~,
> >> but there is in Thomas Grill's xrecord~ (search
> for
> >> 'xsample~' at maxobjects.com), and, as I've just
> >> discovered, there's a new recordf~ object
> ('record
> >> with feedback') in Max 5 which does exactly that,
> >> cheers
> >> Roger
> >
> > -- 
> > Dan Nigrin -  Defective Records
> > 202 Hack / PC-1600 User / VSTi Host / Jack OS X /
> Major Malfunction
> > http://defectiverecords.com
> > http://jackosx.com
> >
>
>


tanks for all the feedback. i need some time to try it out but what are the PeRColate objects and were can i acces them? creasting an object called recordf~ doesn't work.

Quote: nit wrote on Thu, 04 September 2008 23:22

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

> tanks for all the feedback. i need some time to try it out but what are the PeRColate objects and were can i acces them? creasting an object called recordf~ doesn't work.

Quote: nit wrote on Thu, 04 September 2008 23:22
----------------------------------------------------
> tanks for all the feedback. i need some time to try it out but what are the PeRColate objects and were can i acces them? creasting an object called recordf~ doesn't work.
----------------------------------------------------

tried googling it? it's the second link.


Quote: nit wrote on Wed, 03 September 2008 02:16

> i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..

> is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??

well, how about a delay line with feedback ? :)

Quote: nit wrote on Wed, 03 September 2008 02:16
----------------------------------------------------
> i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..
> is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??
----------------------------------------------------

Quote: julien breval wrote on Fri, 05 September 2008 00:37

> Quote: nit wrote on Wed, 03 September 2008 02:16

> ----------------------------------------------------

> > i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..

> > is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??

> well, how about a delay line with feedback ? :)

i'm a noob. don't really get what i should do? enlighten me please.

keep in mind that what i want is processing recorded audio, record that while processing and then go on with the new recorded audio and procces that again and so on without creating to manny buffers and samplers. 

Quote: julien breval wrote on Fri, 05 September 2008 00:37
----------------------------------------------------
> Quote: nit wrote on Wed, 03 September 2008 02:16
> ----------------------------------------------------
> > i want to make a patch were i can sample something from my input, play with it (using groove~ and for instance different loopstart points) and resample that into a new buffer, than process that again and resample that and so on..
> > is there a way to do that without creating a new track for every time you want to resample??
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> well, how about a delay line with feedback ? :)
>
> -j
>
>
----------------------------------------------------

keep in mind that what i want is processing recorded audio, record that while processing and then go on with the new recorded audio and procces that again and so on without creating to manny buffers and samplers. 
i don't want to make sound on sound.


Well, I think I see what you want to do, but it's not sure.

You can do this "manually", in a multitrack software, it's perhaps the most simple solution.

The use of a delay line for doing this is not a common technique in a studio but you can't find anything faster among the realtime techniques ...

It does what you are after, if you place the effect in the feedback loop and if the delay time is superior to the length of the audio you want to process --- it will repeat your sound in loop, the effect becoming stronger and stronger with time. You may record it all and choose the right "pattern" among all the repetitions. It's a kind of joke but it works ... In dub music, they use this technique, not for doing what you want (but the principle is the same), when they add a lowpass filter in the feedback loop of a delay machine.

The use of a delay line for doing this is not a common technique in a studio but you can't find anything faster among the realtime techniques ...
It does what you are after, if you place the effect in the feedback loop and if the delay time is superior to the length of the audio you want to process --- it will repeat your sound in loop, the effect becoming stronger and stronger with time. You may record it all and choose the right "pattern" among all the repetitions. It's a kind of joke but it works ... In dub music, they use this technique, not for doing what you want (but the principle is the same), when they add a lowpass filter in the feedback loop of a delay machine.


Ok. Here is my solution. Essentially what it does is swap between two buffers.

Initially, a buffer containing a drum loop is played back into a frequency shifter. The playback is recorded into buffer0. Once the playback is complete, the wave~ object doing to playback is set to play from buffer0. At the same time, the record~ object is told to record into buffer1.

So, playback occurs again. This time when playback is complete, wave~ is told to playback from buffer1 and record~ is recording into buffer0. This loops endlessly until you tell it to stop.

In case anyone asks, yes the initial sample could have been loaded into buff1 and wave~ could have been set accordingly. I feel like using a separate buffer for the initial sound would make more sense in case the initial sound wasn't from a buffer at all but some other process.

Ok. Here is my solution. Essentially what it does is swap between two buffers. 

Initially, a buffer containing a drum loop is played back into a frequency shifter. The playback is recorded into buffer0. Once the playback is complete, the wave~ object doing to playback is set to play from buffer0. At the same time, the record~ object is told to record into buffer1. 

So, playback occurs again. This time when playback is complete, wave~ is told to playback from buffer1 and record~ is recording into buffer0. This loops endlessly until you tell it to stop. 

In case anyone asks, yes the initial sample could have been loaded into buff1 and wave~ could have been set accordingly. I feel like using a separate buffer for the initial sound would make more sense in case the initial sound wasn't from a buffer at all but some other process. 

you guys should look at STEIM's LiSa software. just spent a week there so i feel i should probably give a shout out

endelss resampling?