Late Max 5 feature request: scale~


    Mar 20 2008 | 3:57 am
    I know this is very late, but could we have a scale~ object in the
    canonical distribution. Recent thread on LFOs reminded me how much
    this is needed.
    Peter McCulloch

    • Mar 20 2008 | 10:41 am
      What, lp.scamp~ doesn't count as canonical?
    • Mar 20 2008 | 5:08 pm
      Sorry, Peter butfree is not quite the same thing as included. Firefox
      is free, but as long as IE is setup as the default for people's web-
      browsers, there's a certain portion of the audience who will never
      download it, even though it does offer lots of cool features and is
      generally more secure. I think that by adding it to the canonical
      distribution it makes it easier to stumble upon, and I think that's a
      good thing.
      There are three versions of the same object on MaxObjects.com
      (f0.scale~, tap.scale~, lp.scamp~, and I wrote an abstraction version
      called PM.Scale~) so it seems like something that enough people may be
      using. This is something that is so useful for doing LFOs, etc. that
      it really does warrant being in the canonical distribution.
      Peter McCulloch
      >
    • Mar 20 2008 | 5:44 pm
      Or expr~
      bt
      On Mar 20, 2008, at 10:08 AM, Peter McCulloch wrote:
      > Sorry, Peter butfree is not quite the same thing as included.
      > Firefox is free, but as long as IE is setup as the default for
      > people's web-browsers, there's a certain portion of the audience who
      > will never download it, even though it does offer lots of cool
      > features and is generally more secure. I think that by adding it to
      > the canonical distribution it makes it easier to stumble upon, and I
      > think that's a good thing.
      >
      > There are three versions of the same object on MaxObjects.com
      > (f0.scale~, tap.scale~, lp.scamp~, and I wrote an abstraction
      > version called PM.Scale~) so it seems like something that enough
      > people may be using. This is something that is so useful for doing
      > LFOs, etc. that it really does warrant being in the canonical
      > distribution.
      >
      > Peter McCulloch
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >>
      >
      barry threw
      Media Art and Technology
      San Francisco, CA
      Work: 857-544-3967
      Email: bthrew (at) gmail (dot) com
      Web: www.barrythrew.com
    • Mar 21 2008 | 1:55 am
      Yes! Thank you!
      On Mar 20, 2008, at 11:44 AM, barry threw wrote:
      > Or expr~
      >
      > bt
      ----
      Steven M. Miller
      Professor, Contemporary Music Program
      College of Santa Fe
      Home
      SFIFEM
      Atrium Sound Space
      OVOS
      CMP
    • Mar 21 2008 | 12:42 pm
      Quote: peter.mcculloch@gmail.com wrote on Thu, 20 March 2008 18:08
      ----------------------------------------------------
      > but free is not quite the same thing as included.
      ----------------------------------------------------
      But the question didn't read "included", nor "free". It read "canonical".
      So the question reduces to how you define "canonical". While you're at it, you might want to define "is".-)
      Lp.scamp~ is on every Max install that I've worked with since July 2001. That's more canonical than one or two objects coming out of Clementina Street. At least in my book.
      Mileage will definitely vary on this one.
      -- P
    • Mar 29 2008 | 10:16 am
      Peter McCulloch schrieb:
      > I know this is very late, but could we have a scale~ object in the
      > canonical distribution. Recent thread on LFOs reminded me how much this
      > is needed.
      This is my scale~:
      --
      Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
      --_____-----------|--------------
      --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
      -- _|_)----|-----()--------------
      ----------()--------www.ccmix.com