flowdesigner

how do i make a basic counter sequencer with ping pong mode?

(first - last - second first - second last etc)

how-do-i-make-a-basic-counter-sequencer-with-ping-pong-mode

I would use 2 alternating counters for this.

Just send "updown" message to the [counter] object.

updown counts "1, 2, 3, 4... 15, 16, 15 ,14 ... 3, 2, 1, 2" which isn't what dear OP wants.

Alternating counters is good - what we do is drive everything from raw ticks in Live, so we aren't using counters.

We derive 32 steps from the transport, and then modulo it out like this:

updown counts "1, 2, 3, 4... 15, 16, 15 ,14 ... 3, 2, 1, 2" which isn't what dear OP wants. 

Alternating counters is good - what we do is drive everything from raw ticks in Live, so we aren't using counters.
We derive 32 steps from the transport, and then modulo it out like this:


It looks like your patch generates "1, 2, 3, 4... 15, 16, 15 ,14 ..." (not what the OP wants).

@Wetterberg
It looks like your patch generates "1, 2, 3, 4... 15, 16, 15 ,14 ..." (not what the OP wants).


I would probably use something like coll or umenu to renumber the output of a linear counter.

@broc whoops, must've pasted the wrong patch. huh.... that's odd. Hang on. Thanks for checking! sorry OP!

just checked... it probably just *looks* that way, but if you check with print or similar you'll see the 1's and 16's repeated.

> updown counts "1, 2, 3, 4... 15, 16, 15 ,14 ... 3, 2, 1, 2" which isn't what dear OP wants.

This is one of the problems very easy to solve in traditional text-based coding, but a bit harder in visual paradigm. In my opinion simplest solution should be javascripting...

Of course it is also possible by combining 2 [counter] object (driven by metro) or re-calculating transport data (maybe with [coll]... - it's nice idea).

It can also be solved with pure math, ie. without counters or coll.

@broc I got this count out of your solution: 16, 2, 15, 3, 14, 4, 13, 5, 12, 6, 11, 7, 10, 8, 9, 1

@yaniki: I'd love to see your js for something like this. In my limited code capacity I can't imagine it being simple.

Yes, the count doesn't contain the first '1' because it's already sent at initialization.

Of course this may be changed depending on context.

@Wetterberg
Yes, the count doesn't contain the first '1' because it's already sent at initialization.
Of course this may be changed depending on context.


I thought OP was looking for "1,2,3,4....15,16,16,15....4,3,2,1"

@Wetterberg: I'd love to see your js for something like this. In my limited code capacity I can't imagine it being simple.

It's a bit like broc's solution. For bang-driven counter:

    if(_current_step > _number_of_steps) _current_step = 0;

        outlet(0, _current_step / 2);

        outlet(0, _number_of_steps - _current_step / 2);

var _current_step = 0;
var _number_of_steps = 16;

if(_current_step >= _number_of_steps) _current_step = 0;

if(_current_step % 2 == 1) outlet(0, _current_step / 2); else outlet(0, _number_of_steps - _current_step / 2);

function bang()
{
  _current_step += 1;
  if(_current_step >= _number_of_steps) _current_step = 0;
  if(_current_step % 2 == 1) outlet(0, _current_step / 2); else outlet(0, _number_of_steps - _current_step / 2);
}


thanks, yaniki. Yeah, they're more or less the exact same code as broc's, only in js, I guess. Thanks for showing me.

Note however that Javascript is generally not suited for controlling a sequencer because it may lead to inaccurate timing (running on low priority thread).

oh yeah, definitely. But these simple examples give some nice insights for luddites like myself ;)

@broc: Note however that Javascript is generally not suited for controlling a sequencer because it may lead to inaccurate timing (running on low priority thread).

Agree - in this case your implementation is much better.