I hit roadblock in the manual


    Jan 31 2007 | 6:23 am
    On test 5, it wasnt the test itself that is causing me problems, though it would have been nice if they had warned me that i should be equipped with the knowledge of calculating linear maps (WTF?!!), so much as it is the flow of it. Im looking at the answer and the flow doesnt make any sense.
    Here for those who may have deleted their tutorial patch folder
    I rewrote the pre-solution shown in the pdf(pg. 139)before they add in all the random generator stuff.
    1. There seems to be output coming from kslider, but seeing as theres nothing going into it and im not clicking on it, where is its output coming from? This troubles me because it seems that the majority of input of this patch is coming from an inactive source.
    2. Why did they include a "int 36" box? i dont see what its purpose is supposed to be. More so, why does the pitch of the inactive kslider feed into the "set value without output" input when the value has already been set to 36? Wouldnt it make more sense to put nothing there at all, or at least "int $1"?
    3. I remember in the beginning of the tutorial it was mentioned that max does everything in reverse, meaning it will work bottom to top, right to left. If thats so, then wouldnt the linear map calculation be passpct% + 5 * 1.5 - 36?

    • Jan 31 2007 | 7:09 am
      Quote: usdryad@hotmail.com wrote on Tue, 30 January 2007 22:23 ---------------------------------------------------- > 1. There seems to be output coming from kslider, but seeing as >theres nothing going into it and im not clicking on it, where is >its output coming from? This troubles me because it seems that >the majority of input of this patch is coming from an inactive >source.
      Once you turn on the metro it bangs the int 36 box a certain percentage of the time which tells make note to create MIDI note 36 at a velocity of 80 (velocity is determined by the argument in makenote). So the activity comes from the metro. Is that what you mean?
      > > 2. Why did they include a "int 36" box? i dont see what its >purpose is supposed to be. More so, why does the pitch of the >inactive kslider feed into the "set value without output" input >when the value has already been set to 36? Wouldnt it make more >sense to put nothing there at all, or at least "int $1"?
      See above. 36 is simply a starting note which the user can change via the keyslider. It could have been left blank but then, as you observed, the patch would not make any sound until you clicked on the keyslider (though actually mine makes a nice hum trying to play MIDI note zero). Also, as far as I know $1 only works in message boxes, not in objects.
      > > 3. I remember in the beginning of the tutorial it was mentioned >that max does everything in reverse, meaning it will work bottom >to top, right to left. If thats so, then wouldnt the linear map >calculation be passpct% + 5 * 1.5 - 36?
      Right to left yes, but still top to bottom....outlet flows to inlet.
      > ----------------------------------------------------
    • Feb 01 2007 | 3:02 pm
      the "bottom to top" ordering can be a little confusing, but all it just means that if you have an out connected to two objects and they are aligned vertically (i.e there is no 'right' or 'left' object, because they are both in the same y axis) then the outlet will send its data to the bottom object first, and then then one above it.
      Here is an example:
    • Feb 01 2007 | 3:26 pm
    • Feb 01 2007 | 4:11 pm
      Not only does the trigger object work well for the purposes of good patch hygiene, but the world appears to be positively chock-full of folks who believe them- selves to be too clever [I once considered myself to be one of those persons] to do the tutorials and thus are unlikely to learn anything about the way that data makes its way through a Max patch. The judicious use of the trigger object can provide a good way to fix problems and remind folks of the right-to-left, bottom-to-top flow of data. When faced with that, some people actually see the light and begin to figure out why something in other parts of their patch don't work.
      Of course, Max patches can be traced, too [psst: the Max Topics manual, chapter on debugging]
    • Feb 01 2007 | 4:19 pm
      Quote: jeanfrancois.charles wrote on Thu, 01 February 2007 08:41 ---------------------------------------------------- > Is that documented anywhere? > If not, I will keep saying NEVER rely on that.
    • Feb 01 2007 | 4:20 pm
      > Is that documented anywhere? > If not, I will keep saying NEVER rely on that.
      On a slightly less droll note:
    • Feb 01 2007 | 6:28 pm
      From the Max46TutorialAndTopics.pdf tutorial #7 summary (pages 34, 35)
      "An object with multiple outlets sends messages out its outlet in order from right-to-left. When multiple patch cords are connected to a single outlet, the messages are sent in right-to-left order, depending on the position of the receiving objects. (If the receiving objects are perfectly aligned vertically, the order is bottom-to-top)"
    • Feb 01 2007 | 6:56 pm
    • Feb 01 2007 | 11:28 pm
      And here's mao's max guide in pictures:
      On Feb 1, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Nick Inhofe wrote:
      > >>> From the Max46TutorialAndTopics.pdf tutorial #7 summary (pages >>> 34, 35) > > "An object with multiple outlets sends messages out its outlet in > order from right-to-left. When multiple patch cords are connected > to a single outlet, the messages are sent in right-to-left order, > depending on the position of the receiving objects. (If the > receiving objects are perfectly aligned vertically, the order is > bottom-to-top)" >
    • Feb 01 2007 | 11:41 pm
      On 1 Feb 2007, at 16:11, Gregory Taylor wrote:
      > The judicious > use of the trigger object can provide a good way to > fix problems and remind folks of the right-to-left, > bottom-to-top flow of data.
      Oddly enough, despite having been programming Max for about 15 years, I have never, ever assumed right-to-left or bottom-to-top in fanouts; I think I discovered the trigger object in the first week and never needed to concern myself with such irritating topographic issues.
      -- N.
      nick rothwell -- composition, systems, performance -- http:// www.cassiel.com
    • Feb 02 2007 | 12:08 am
      .....
      Well played sir!
      On Feb 1, 2007, at 6:28 PM, nesa wrote:
      > And here's mao's max guide in pictures: > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/rtol.jpg > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/btotop.jpg > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/encapsulate.jpg > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/bang.jpg > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/rtfm.jpg > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/onemetro.jpg > > http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/search.jpg > > On Feb 1, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Nick Inhofe wrote: > >> >>>> From the Max46TutorialAndTopics.pdf tutorial #7 summary (pages >>>> 34, 35) >> >> "An object with multiple outlets sends messages out its outlet in >> order from right-to-left. When multiple patch cords are connected >> to a single outlet, the messages are sent in right-to-left order, >> depending on the position of the receiving objects. (If the >> receiving objects are perfectly aligned vertically, the order is >> bottom-to-top)" >> >
      v a d e //
      www.vade.info abstrakt.vade.info
    • Feb 02 2007 | 12:14 am
    • Feb 02 2007 | 4:32 am
      > And here's mao's max guide in pictures....
      "So shines a good deed in a weary world."
      paraphrasing Shakespeare>
    • Feb 02 2007 | 10:11 am
      Fantastic! That really made my day. I am tempted to pirate the 'rtfm' one and substitute a Final Cut Pro manual cover for the benefit of our students, but as we have a particularly troublesome Chinese student here atm, it could be taken the wrong way ;-) Btw, when I click the links from the original post they open as text, whereas they work fine from a post in which they're quoted - wtf? cheers Roger
      --- nesa wrote:
    • Feb 02 2007 | 10:24 am
      On 2-Feb-2007, at 0:28, nesa wrote:
      This one, in particular, is enormously telling about the original context.
      -------------- http://www.bek.no/~pcastine/Litter/ ------------- Peter Castine +--> Litter Power & Litter Bundle for Jitter Universal Binaries on the way iCE: Sequencing, Recording & Interface Building for |home | chez nous| Max/MSP Extremely cool |bei uns | i nostri| http://www.dspaudio.com/ http://www.castine.de
    • Feb 02 2007 | 2:27 pm
      Hmmm.... Do grovels cluster by language or country of origin? I can readily imagine that a certain kind of question might be common for someone for whom English is a second/third etc. language, and particularly so if they haven't adopted the trick of using the search feature in Acrobat.
      But could one actually claim that the sequential grovel [ask for one solution, connect patch cord, ask for the next one] is quintessentially an EU thing, whereas the American asks for everything up front? It's interesting to speculate on this as a culturally bound phenonomenon.
      The assumption among beginners that there is a single way to do things appears nearly universal, though. :-)
    • Feb 02 2007 | 4:16 pm
      On 2-Feb-2007, at 15:27, Gregory Taylor wrote:
      > The assumption among beginners that there is a single > way to do things appears nearly universal, though. :-)
      I always introduce the Perl Programmer's Motto in about the second meeting of an Introdution to Max class:
      TMTOWTDI
      Look it up at .
      -------------- http://www.bek.no/~pcastine/Litter/ ------------- Peter Castine +--> Litter Power & Litter Bundle for Jitter Universal Binaries on the way iCE: Sequencing, Recording & Interface Building for |home | chez nous| Max/MSP Extremely cool |bei uns | i nostri| http://www.dspaudio.com/ http://www.castine.de
    • Nov 08 2009 | 11:38 am
      Bringing up the old thread just to ask a simple question: does anybody knows - what were the initial reasons (usability, historical etc) to choose the rtl-btt message ordering behavior in Max/MSP?