Michael

I'm feeling stumped on how to approach this and was hoping that someone could please help me with this problem. 

I have a dynamic list as per example below:

The numbers should be read in pairs, where the first number in the pair represents the index and the second number represents the stored value. 

I would like to recall the stored values  using an index input so that:

PS. I am aware the the live grid object is one way of doing it however i would like to avoid this approach. 

I'm feeling stumped on how to approach this and was hoping that someone could please help me with this problem. 

I have a dynamic list as...

index-based-value-retrieval

something does not match in your example,

and you recall index nn ( 0 or 1 based ? )

Think of them as groupings or identifiers. 4 and 3 belong to group / identifier 1.

then zl.iter 2, followed by merge $1 $2 into coll

Thanks, is there a way to do this without the use of a matrix? This approach is similar to what I was thinking when using the live grid object. 

There might be a bit of misunderstanding here.

SOURCE AUDIO used a [coll] to store the content of your list, because it seems to be the most straightforward way to do it. Then they use a [jit.cellbock] simply to display the content of that [coll], which makes it look like a matrix, but a coll(ection) is more like a list of lists rather than a matrix, even though it can be represented as a 1 plane matrix (with wholes, as rows can have various number of elements) like here.

You can double-click the [coll] object to see how data is stored in it.

What is awesome with this approach is that now you can edit, retrieve and manipulate your lists both through the [coll] and/or the [jit.cellblock], as their content is synced.

Yes, that is true so, but I had bad experiences with editing jit.cellblock refered to a coll.

If used merely for display , it is safe, but slows things a bit for larger data.

I use to place it into patches when coll is in use just to show it does what it should...

I have played around with this now and it actually works perfectly. 

Index-Based Value Retrieval