I agree wth Andreas in that it seems a tad long winded. Stay clear of division it is unfriendly.<br><br><br>1000 divided by 100<br><br>The Reciprocal is:<br><br>1000 multiplied by 0.01 (same thing very much faster.<br><br>
<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 01/01/2008, <b class="gmail_sendername">Andreas Wetterberg</b> <<a href="mailto:awetterberg@post.cybercity.dk">awetterberg@post.cybercity.dk</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>I would definitely steer clear of using timer to do this. It seems (to me) to be a very roundabout way of getting back a value that you yourself have set (in phasor~ or sync~).<br><br>Like smill said:<br>Even more direct would be to simply take the reciprocal of the frequency of the
<br>master [phasor~] (to get the period) and use this to set the delay<br>time. You could also, of course, multiply and/or divide this period<br>to get multiples/divisions of the sync signal.<br>_______________________________________________
<br>maxmsp mailing list<br><a href="mailto:maxmsp@cycling74.com">maxmsp@cycling74.com</a><br><a href="http://www.cycling74.com/mailman/listinfo/maxmsp">http://www.cycling74.com/mailman/listinfo/maxmsp</a><br></blockquote>
</div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>A Pereshaped definition of a rotten Apple: <br>"You will never know what size worm is in your next apple byte"!