sluzi in Max 5
Hi,
Has anyone got the sluzi object to work in Max 5. I've recently downloaded it from http://www.publicbeta.cx/max/.
I can't install it. I haven't used it in Max 4 so I don't know if it's Max or me.
Thanks
If you can't get it to work you should be able to recreate it fairly easily with [metro] and [counter]. Give it a go but feel free to ask if you need any pointers.
lh
110.uzicount! ;)
Here's an abstraction:
M
On Jan 19, 2009, at 9:18 AM, mattyo wrote:
> Here's an abstraction:
Your abstraction has issues with the grain for line.
Why not just use metro&counter instead? Uzi was designed to be a too-
fast replacement for metro and counter, anyway.
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
I just thought it contained fewer moving parts then metro/counter.
Also, I don't see the problem -- if I test it with timer & counter, I
seem to get the expected number of bangs at the expected rate....
M
On Jan 19, 2009, at 16:11, Chris Muir wrote:
>
> On Jan 19, 2009, at 9:18 AM, mattyo wrote:
>
>> Here's an abstraction:
>
>
> Your abstraction has issues with the grain for line.
>
> Why not just use metro&counter instead? Uzi was designed to be a too-
> fast replacement for metro and counter, anyway.
>
>
>
>
> Chris Muir
> cbm@well.com
> http://www.xfade.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
On Jan 19, 2009, at 8:02 PM, mattyo wrote:
> I just thought it contained fewer moving parts then metro/counter.
> Also, I don't see the problem -- if I test it with timer & counter,
> I seem to get the expected number of bangs at the expected rate....
Sorry. I just wasn't initializing your solution properly. I had edited
it to use patcherargs, and didn't do a good job of that. It works as
expected, once I fixed it.
That said, it does take more objects than the metro/counter solution.
Here's the metro/counter solution with extraneous stuff stripped out:
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
And, I'm big enough to admit it, that although I assumed that line
would be more efficient than metro/counter (which is why I did it that
way to begin with), your version seems to use less CPU, so I'm
rewriting my sluzi abstraction & standing corrected....
M
On Jan 20, 2009, at 0:16, Chris Muir wrote:
>
> On Jan 19, 2009, at 8:02 PM, mattyo wrote:
>
>> I just thought it contained fewer moving parts then metro/counter.
>> Also, I don't see the problem -- if I test it with timer & counter,
>> I seem to get the expected number of bangs at the expected rate....
>
>
> Sorry. I just wasn't initializing your solution properly. I had
> edited it to use patcherargs, and didn't do a good job of that. It
> works as expected, once I fixed it.
>
> That said, it does take more objects than the metro/counter
> solution. Here's the metro/counter solution with extraneous stuff
> stripped ou
This is how I do it with counter and metro - same output behavior as uzi.
best,
Zachary
save as metroUzi.maxpat:
example utilizing metroUzi:
Mine does what I said it does (reproduces the output behavior of uzi), just missing the control. Yours is better though ;)
On Jan 22, 2009, at 8:03 PM, Zachary Seldess wrote:
> Mine does what I said it does (reproduces the output behavior of
> uzi), just missing the control
Stefan's does do one very important Uzi thing that yours doesn't: it
accepts an int into its left inlet to set the number of bangs, and
start banging.
- C
Chris Muir
cbm@well.com
http://www.xfade.com
",just missing the control"
Yes, I know, and it accepts all the other controls typical to uzi that mine doesn't (break, resume, etc.).
Zachary