frequency pitch to groove~ pitch translation
could anyone give me a hint how to translate (eventually midi controlled and tempered) tone pitch to controlling pitch with a groove object?
obviously pitch value 1 is the base tone, 2 is an octave, 3 is a quint above, 4 is the 3nd octave and following harmonic division of frequencies, nevertheless:
how can i establish to control semitones for the pitch of the groove object?
i am aware of the existence of a scaling system, but can’t find info within this forum as the search function here is rather limited (if only for the 30 secs limit)
dedicated for the one inclined: thank you very much in advance!
I think this might help you. The second number box sets the number of steps between octaves, so in your case you could set "$f2" to "12" inside the [expr]. The toggle switches between forwards and backwards and the first number box does the calculation: 0 for normal speed, 12 for double speed, -12 for half speed and so on.
----------begin_max5_patcher---------- 521.3ocyV00aaBCE8Y3WgkUdnchkw0.IjI0G1ui0pIBXR7DwFEbTyVU+uO6K PV5Go0MjkrW.4qOb84d7wWyC9dz4ps7FJ4qjuS77dv2yCCYC30M1itJaadUV CBiJ42ql+SZP6TZ9VMFVSlSD8QUazUbs9W071LSmmIWPCHTgzf9tNT0Y57kB 4herlmqaANIbbX.Ich8YDabR.gYhr6KJURsLaElU52VKxp5WQ4lUBoYMQNB6 AuQ7aDNvL4bG1VBhfYcQEEXVM01mApMzi991GANpKkUJShOnBXlNSak.TJdK M.hmYKeHJx9JAUjKhJDdLxvArGhRxHAbyMgD8Rtj.DdUCmXT5NfUBIOWsQp2 mLuPDcv6zpWoInCJ9erpAuT0ROFQSqVrnhePuiamZXo8Nkm4Wd056cKjomvc +OQfwuyICWNQ.vv5KvF3daxEsu.KAUgIwW11BwmPeAea8ZRs59qXiu81fqFU BeYTI65qoGUCfNaR6sG.a1wpPC0lD8+v0GWZaBaeQ.WbrG+y9UCj+13OUYZT aVm2W5s2HGP9aITvazBYlVnj6gI4IXVJJJ33z8TdknnVYZk1QgIyrsQfPrqI jjtaD4tWc66iPUvApBtS0T7OA5o5T1tQCjpoNnpvGSUGHiXNvnnyJihcjQvY iQQm9yBCjQScfQomUFk3hyNb.TxL3Q++.brEGzN -----------end_max5_patcher-----------
thank you very much!
could thi spossibly be aplied to some kind of keyboard object as well?
please excuse my probably very standard inquieries… and feel free to not answer in case i am too demanding.
Look at [kslider] you could easily hook this up to the left inlet of the [expr] object in my patch. You will have to open the [kslider] object info panel and change the offset and number of notes displayed to get what you want though. Ask as many questions on this forum as you like but bear in mind that for simple questions like this people are likely to point you to the tutorials and with good reason: they are the best place to start.
No problem about the tutorials, i read them a lot these days, thanx for reminding, and thanx very much for your help.
If I understand this might help you.
----------begin_max5_patcher---------- 153.3ocQNFsBCCBCE843Wgjm6FcSFztekgLrNYqipVVsPGk9uOMZYujfm3Mm rx.ryuXlP9U9MN.qL.HTB.k2.ZUK5A0D8Mr2MXBXUdha15mCQ.M6TgNpB5W8 tm2+Xzg7tEMhi0UbQaapc9xdkKKYxqI7czjCD8DiJ+6g7RZpKv9GzA46denY +fzdq03HoHlPaLVpvkrM1OPo1Zy9 -----------end_max5_patcher-----------
On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 11:27 PM, jayrope wrote:
> No problem about the tutorials, i read them a lot these days, thanx for
> reminding, and thanx very much for your help.
> fiction-induced heat
desiredfish, i am afraid your patch shows only one outlet.
don’t worry, i got it working already thanx to thereishopforus.
Ew, but the "transratio" patch uses the nasty looking [expr exp(0.057762265*$f1)] which works just as well but doesn’t make much sense. [expr pow(2.,($f1/12))] seems a lot nicer to me.
I have the same problem with the [ftom] help patch explaining the calculation as [expr (69. + (1./0.057762265) * log($f1/440.))]. Obviously not an actual problem as it’s the exact same maths going on. However, to me, it looks plain wrong.
Whilst I’m on the subject of evil maths someone please destroy the last inlet of [scale]! ;)
i gues sthe difference is just because 0.057762265*$f1 is less ‘expensive’ computing then $f1/12. obviously under certain circumstances $f1/12 would be more exact…