Cheng Chien-Wen

Could anyone let me know the differences between specifying the frequency of cycle~ from the left inlet and specifying the frequency by using phasor~ to drive cycle~ from the right inlet?

I try to use scope~ to compare the outputs, but they seem to look the same. I would like to kwno how they are different, and when and why we need to use phasor~ to drive cycle~.

question-about-cycle-driven-by-phasor

with phasor, the buffer of cycle is been scanned.

you could, for example, also play backwards or 

the phasor is used to syncronize cycles, you need

it when you want to change more than one cycle 

typical situations for using phasor is building 

various kinds of oscillators or wavetables.

with phasor, the buffer of cycle is been scanned.
you could, for example, also play backwards or 
distorted from cycle.

the phasor is used to syncronize cycles, you need
it when you want to change more than one cycle 
objects at once and have them synced.

typical situations for using phasor is building 
various kinds of oscillators or wavetables.

The advantage of user phasor~ driven cycle~s (or any other waveform, for that matter), as Roman says, is that you can sync them using rate~, and keep their phases & frequencies relative.

This includes using the global transport (eg. ) so that your LFO's etc. can all be driven from a central phasor~, which will also keep sync with non-signal events , ie. metro etc.

The advantage of user phasor~ driven cycle~s (or any other waveform, for that matter), as Roman says, is that you can sync them using rate~, and keep their phases & frequencies relative.
 This includes using the global transport (eg. ) so that your LFO's etc. can all be driven from a central phasor~, which will also keep sync with non-signal events , ie. metro etc.
 More fun than a barrel o' monkeys!
cheers
Roger


question about cycle~ driven by phasor