Subject: Re: [ecasound] controlling controllers
From: S. Massy (theanaloguekid@tak.net.dhis.org)
Date: Mon Sep 03 2001 - 20:39:22 EEST
On Mon, 03 Sep 2001, janne halttunen <jhalttun@pp.htv.fi> wrote:
> But then again, there would appear similar 'branches' when you go deeper:
>
> -effect
> -ctrl1 (controls effect) -kx -ctrl2 (controls ctrl1)
> -ctrl3 (controls ctrl1) -kx -ctrl4 (controls ctrl3)
>
> ..now I could reach effect with -kx:0 switch, but how about ctrl2? Should
> there be -kx:y, where y would be the distance from the following controller,
> special-casing 0, which would mean the effect?
>
> So that if I wanted to start a branch on ctrl2:
>
> -effect
> -ctrl1 (controls effect) -kx -ctrl2 (controls ctrl1)
> -ctrl3 (controls ctrl1) -kx -ctrl4 (controls ctrl3)
> -kx:3 -ctrl5 (controls ctrl2)
>
> What do you think?
The latter seems the best way to go about it logicwise, where it
basically is considered as a tree, where there basically can be as
many branches as there are parameters to control on each
level. The root of the tree is the cop and then each subsequent
controller is a node on the tree; you select to what controller you
are going to refer to by the number of the node, basically as you just
said (with nodes numbered in their order of definition and zero
referring to the root or cop). Now, that's the logic way to go, but is
it of any practical use? So far, the most complex setup I've ever had
in term of controllers was two controllers targeting a cop with one
of these controllers being controlled in turn, but maybe others have
more complex needs in that respect.
>
>
> janne
>
> --
> To unsubscribe send message 'unsubscribe' in the body of the
> message to <ecasound-list-request@wakkanet.fi>.
>
-- To unsubscribe send message 'unsubscribe' in the body of the message to <ecasound-list-request@wakkanet.fi>.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Sep 03 2001 - 20:38:04 EEST