8/13/97 11:01 PM
Subject: MAX Digest - 12 Aug 1997 to 13 Aug
1997To: Recipients of MAX digests 

There are 6 messages totalling 168 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. panning
  2. MAC World Expo Report: BeOS DSP Audio
  3. I-CubeX Standalone Programming
  4. Saving patchers (2)
  5. MAX Digest - 11 Aug 1997 to 12 Aug 1997


Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 16:43:38 +1000
From:    Iain Mott 
Subject: Re: panning

> the result
>is much better than with the linear interpolation, but still there is a too
>little level in the middle (perhaps -3 dB). Maybe it is only due to the
>NICHE - I don't know what function this device uses internally.
might be an idea to run a test signal through a channel of the hardware
device - stepping up through the controller values. Save the output as a
sound file and examine it in an editing program. If the amplitude response
is non-linear, you could construct a lookup table to compensate.


Iain Mott                                               ph      (03) 6226
Conservatorium of Music                 Int     +61 3 6226 7326
GPO 252-63, Hobart 7001               fax     (03) 6221 7318
Tasmania                                            Int.    +61 3 6221 7318


Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 00:54:49 -0700
From:    Richard Zvonar 
Subject: Re: MAC World Expo Report: BeOS DSP Audio

At 12:13 AM -0700 8/12/97, Nick Longo wrote:

>So now the Be is free?  And most of the software is free
>too?  I'm sorry, maybe I'm just an ignorant AOLer, but does this strike
>anybody else as fishy?

In the words of the kindly neighborhood dope peddler, "The first one is

Be, Inc's strategy is to launch the OS by giving away a million copies.
(It's a little like those pesky disks and CDs that AOL mails out, though
IMHO Be's value is considerably greater).  This makes it cheap and easy for
developers to get started and makes it easy for anyone with a PowerMac to
try it out.  Once they're hooked they'll be happy to pay for more.

Actually, the first commercial apps were on sale at MacWorld Expo, and
there were even some $49.95 Be developer kits.

Richard Zvonar, PhD                    
(818) 760-8055 voice/fax



Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 08:37:50 -0500
From:    Paul Hertz 
Subject: I-CubeX Standalone Programming


I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has been working with the
I-CubeX system, a version of the I-Cube interface with standalone
capability thanks to a new ROM. Essentially one can put the I-CubeX
interface into standalone (as opposed to Host mode, where it relies on MAX)
and program the way its voltage inputs respond by sending out MIDI. I'm
using the thang to respond to user presence, detected with various sensors,
to trigger animation in MacroMedia Director. So far I cannot get the
bundled software (3 MAXPlay applications) to send MIDI configuration
information to it, though it receives MIDI just fine. I've had to set the
parameters numerically with Sysex messages from MAX--a chore I'd rather

-- Paul (Paul Hertz)                | (*,*) (+,+) (#,#) (=,=) |      | (#,=) (=,#) (*,+) (+,*) |
The Collaboratory Project                      | (=,+) (#,*) (+,=) (*,#) |
Northwestern University                        | (+,#) (*,=) (=,*) (#,+) |


Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 16:24:19 +0200
From:    Dominique David 
Subject: Re: Saving patchers

Ed Hartley wrote:

> What annoys me is that I have to return to the top level patcher whenever
> want to save my work. On a big project, I can have a whole screenfull of
> windows open at once and I'd rather not be bothered interrupting myself to
> call up the parent patcher just to type  "command-S." (I programed one of
> trackball buttons to save because I've learned the hard way to save often.
> Repeat after me... Save Often...) Does this annoy anyone else? The "stub"
> object doesn't really excite me but I would love an option, say, in the
> OPTIONS menu that would interpret save commands as referring to the
> parent of the active subpatcher. It seems to me that the current system
> calls up the "save as" dialog  box is counterintuitive. Why should it be
> easier to save subpatchers than their parent patchers ? Thoughts?
> Ed Hartley

Personally, I share that opinion that it would be more "natural" to save the
uppermost parent patcher rather than the currently opened subpatcher. You
sometimes a lot of intermediate levels of embedded subpatchers, and it is
not so
convenient to go up to the parent patcher for saving, and then retrieving
subpatcher you are currently editing. How many times did I cancel the dialog
proposing to save that subpatcher, when I was attempting to save rapidly my
whole patcher?

dominique David


Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 14:48:53 -0000
From:    Nick Rothwell 
Subject: Re: Saving patchers

> Personally, I share that opinion that it would be more "natural" to
> save the uppermost parent patcher rather than the currently opened
> subpatcher.

My feeling is that the issue is something else, and these problems
only arise if one is very attached to the pattern of open windows in a
patcher and its subpatchers. I always do a "close all subpatchers"
before saving, anyway, since the pattern of currently open windows
isn't important to me, and if it was, I'd automate it via thispatcher
messages. I'd be happy for a single-key "close all subpatchers and
save all the resulting top-level patchers" command. Others here
obviously feel differently, which is cool, but perhaps there's not a
consensus on what the problem actually is?

(Or perhaps there is, in which case I'll shut up.)

         Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL        contemporary dance projects        music synthesis and control

             years, passing by, VCO, VCF, and again, and again


Date:    Wed, 13 Aug 1997 09:33:51 +0100
From:    Peter Nyboer 
Subject: Re: MAX Digest - 11 Aug 1997 to 12 Aug 1997

>Wait a minute, free?

I looked at (what a holisitic URL!) and found that our friendly
originator of this Be thread was a bit mistaken:  Be was giving away free
copies at MacWorld in Boston, but for us non-attenders, we still need to
shell out some money (though I don't think much).  Actually, I shouldn't
include myself in "we" since BeOS requires a 603 or 604 PowerPC chip, and
there is absolutely no hope for a BeOS for the 601 (in 6100/7100/7200/8100)
machines.  Bummer.  That DSP program sounded pretty worthwhile...

Peter Nyboer
home of Slambassador multimedia gallery
"This is a fictional story with mostly facts in it."


End of MAX Digest - 12 Aug 1997 to 13 Aug 1997