Matrix~ gain problem


    Dec 12 2006 | 11:54 pm
    I'm trying to use a matrix~ to route different sources to different effects. I thought that the matrix automatically scaled gains so that if I send 2 sources to the same out that they would automatically scale without clipping. I can't get this to work though, everything clips anytime I send more then one signal anywhere. What am I doing wrong?

    • Dec 13 2006 | 12:44 am
    • Dec 13 2006 | 9:13 am
    • Dec 13 2006 | 10:17 am
      Chris wrote:
      > I thought that the matrix automatically scaled gains so that if I
      > send 2 sources to the same out that they would automatically scale
      > without clipping.
      I am glad its not doing anything like that automatically, as its not as
      simple as you might think. If you do it the safe way and dampen the
      output by 6 dB for each doubling, you would get much much too low output
      with real world signals (there 3 dB is more appropriate). Its so
      dependend on what you send to it that you as patcher have to do it
      yourself and thus be able to control the subtleties.
      The most easy way, is to do it like in analog mixers. Just place a
      volume control before or behind it and lower the level if its clipping.
      Let your ear decide...
      And don't forget, the patch isn't clipping, only the signal you send to
      the dac~ might be clipped there. If you put a level control just before
      the dac~s you should be fine for all circumstances in any patch...
      > What am I doing wrong?
      Not too much, just the concept that the machine should do musical
      decisions automatically never fits, but the machine can take away the
      burdens of a technical view to the topic...
      Stefan
      --
      Stefan Tiedje------------x-------
      --_____-----------|--------------
      --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()-------
      -- _|_)----|-----()--------------
      ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • Dec 13 2006 | 1:34 pm
      Also, if you'd like some useful abstractions for dealing with matrix~
      using multisliders or lists, e-mail me off list. Handles useful tasks
      like making a simple (but v. CPU efficient) stereo mixer and such...
      thanks,
      Peter McCulloch
      On Dec 12, 2006, at 6:54 PM, Chris wrote:
      >
      > I'm trying to use a matrix~ to route different sources to different
      > effects. I thought that the matrix automatically scaled gains so that
      > if I send 2 sources to the same out that they would automatically
      > scale without clipping. I can't get this to work though, everything
      > clips anytime I send more then one signal anywhere. What am I doing
      > wrong?
      >
    • Dec 13 2006 | 10:54 pm
    • Dec 14 2006 | 1:11 am
    • Dec 14 2006 | 7:04 am
      #F?$"]tlbraddock wrote on Tue, 12 December 2006 16:54
      ----------------------------------------------------
      > I'm trying to use a matrix~ to route different sources to different effects. I thought that the matrix automatically scaled gains so that if I send 2 sources to the same out that they would automatically scale without clipping. I can't get this to work though, everything clips anytime I send more then one signal anywhere. What am I doing wrong?
      ----------------------------------------------------
      from what i know it does not scale down.
      but if you split a signal into 2 signals and multiply
      them again, it should not clip, at least not when your
      input sigal did not exceed 0.999999, so it is still
      right that you exspect this behaviour.
      are you sure it is not something in your effects?
      eventually post an example patch if you want a more
      helpful answer.
      -110
    • Dec 14 2006 | 10:49 am
      On 14-Dec-2006, at 8:29, f.e wrote:
      > Lea, when a regular external (or one that *should* be loaded
      > because you *know* it's there) can't load, it's 99% sure that
      > something with the same name but a different extension is in the
      > search path. I wonder if this comes from the macintosh heritage of
      > max and if it could be fixed someday.
      foo.mxe, foo.mxt, foo.mxb, foo.pat (for example) are all valid
      matches on disk for an object box that has 'foo' written inside.
      This has really very little at all to do with the Mac OS heritage
      (although the files would, in the good old days, have all simply been
      called foo and have had different meta-data).
      What could maybe be changed is Max' strategy of finding the first
      matching foo.*, trying it, and throwing in the towel if it doesn't
      load. Max could concievably continue searching for another
      foo.somethingelsewhoknowswhatbutyouknowifyoulookhardenoughyoumightfindso
      mething
      file. It would just take longer.
      There might be downsides to this idea, sais pas.
      -------------- 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|
    • Dec 14 2006 | 5:44 pm
      Peter Castine wrote:
      > On 14-Dec-2006, at 8:29, f.e wrote:
      >
      >> Lea, when a regular external (or one that *should* be loaded because
      >> you *know* it's there) can't load, it's 99% sure that something with
      >> the same name but a different extension is in the search path. I
      >> wonder if this comes from the macintosh heritage of max and if it
      >> could be fixed someday.
      >
      > foo.mxe, foo.mxt, foo.mxb, foo.pat (for example) are all valid matches
      > on disk for an object box that has 'foo' written inside.
      Yes, for sure, if they're not all in the max search path !
      f.e
      >