Has anyone seen a puredata implementation of Andrew Simper's dynamic smoothing algorithm?
https://cytomic.com/files/dsp/DynamicSmoothing.pdf

@ben.wes awesome

... and probably the last update on this for the time being (unless people find errors, of course):

the latest changes add multichannel support to the external (it might be nice to allow different base frequencies and different sensitivities for different channels - but i'll skip that for now).

@ben.wes ah, multichannel support - just what I need

Sorry, I am still very new to plugdata, and I get error messages with dynsmoth-abs-efficient~ -mc 32
bad arguments for message 'f' to object 'objectmaker'

Where exactly do I place your dynsmooth~ folder (downloaded from releases)? In Abstraction and Externals? Thanks a LOT!

@trummerschlunk said:

Sorry, I am still very new to plugdata, and I get error messages with dynsmoth-abs-efficient~ -mc 32
bad arguments for message 'f' to object 'objectmaker'

ah, wait ... you don't need to do anything for multichannel support - it just takes multichannel signals as input and outputs the smoothed multichannel signal. but i only added that for the external (dynsmooth~) - for the abstractions, it would also be simple, i think - but i didn't attempt yet. would need to change the feedback to multichannel.

Where exactly do I place your dynsmooth~ folder (downloaded from releases)? In Abstraction and Externals? Thanks a LOT!

in any folder that pd knows. ... but externals would be fine, sure! and pd will automatically search in the dynsmooth~ folder for the external with the same name (for the abstractions, you'd need to use dynsmooth~/dynsmooth-abs~ unless you add the folder to the paths).

Understood. I still can't load the external somehow. Maybe because I am on a arm/silicon Mac?
The abstractions are loading.

Would dynsmooth~ then be the accurate or the efficient version?

Would it run in 'compiled mode' in plugdata?

@trummerschlunk said:

[...] Maybe because I am on a arm/silicon Mac?

the builds include binaries for both, silicon and intel Macs (on M2 here myself - so that's even the only build that's actually tested ).

Would dynsmooth~ then be the accurate or the efficient version?

dynsmooth~ initializes the accurate version. if you create dynsmooth~ -e, it'll use the efficient algorithm. also, you can initialize base frequency and sensitivity with creation args like this: dynsmooth~ -e 100 0.01 for example.

Would it run in 'compiled mode' in plugdata?

compiled mode only supports the object that are known by the heavy compiler:
https://github.com/Wasted-Audio/hvcc/blob/develop/docs/09.supported_vanilla_objects.md

... unfortunately, block~ (for the 1-sample feedback) is not supported - so i'm afraid that it's not an option to use the abstractions in that mode.

ah - and i forgot to mention in the previous response: i made another little update to the abstractions so that you can set the channel count via a channels <count> message:

• https://github.com/ben-wes/pd-dynsmooth_tilde/releases/tag/0.4.0-test2

unfortunately, it's necessary to set the count of send~ objects manually that way.

@ben.wes said:

the builds include binaries for both, silicon and intel Macs (on M2 here myself - so that's even the only build that's actually tested ).

I accidentally installed the wrong (pd64) version. Now, pd32 dynsmooth~ external works perfectly. Also multichannel

... unfortunately, block~ (for the 1-sample feedback) is not supported - so i'm afraid that it's not an option to use the abstractions in that mode.

hm, too bad. Same is true for the external, I guess?

@trummerschlunk said:

hm, too bad. Same is true for the external, I guess?

yep. vanilla patches are the only option for that ... but when it comes to 1-sample feedback without block~ 1, the only options are the filter objects (rpole~ etc.). i'm honestly not completely sure if this dynamic smoothing here could be achieved in some other way (like obtaining x[n-1] via rzero_rev~ 0) - but i don't think so.