Hi Charlie,

I think I found it: .1::ms is not the same as 1::samp
You do in both scripts .1 ::ms => now, but in the second variant, this means now will have increased by 4.1 samples, instead of 1 unit (depending on your samplerate).
I could get the same sound from both scripts by changing .1::ms => now to samp => now;

Best,
Casper

On 27 Jan 2019, at 14:58, Charlie <taos.points@gmail.com> wrote:

Hey folks, I'm puzzled why these two shreds don't make the same sound. I created a simple bit crusher using an integer as an index and then using time as an index; I thought these were equivalent but they aren't. I wonder if this is because the integer increments at a  different rate than the sampling rate? Any guidance on this gratefully received! Thanks,

Charlie 

First shred:
//---------------------------------------------

SinOsc s => dac;

110 => s.freq;

0 => int i;
250 => int iMax;
0 => int jCount;

while (true) {
i++;

// if (i%130 == 0 || i%201 ==0 || i% 737 == 0) 0 =>s.gain;
    if (i%iMax > jCount ) 0.0 =>s.gain;
jCount++;
if (jCount > iMax) 0 => jCount;
// 1::samp => now;
    .1::ms => now;
1 => s.gain;

}

//---------------------------------------------

second shred:

//---------------------------------------------

SinOsc s => dac;

110 => s.freq;

0::samp => dur jMin;
250::samp => dur iMax;
0::samp => dur jCount;
1::samp => dur jDelta;

while (true) {

if (now%iMax > jCount ) 0.0 =>s.gain;
jCount+jDelta => jCount;
if (jCount > iMax) jMin => jCount;
.1::ms => now;
1 => s.gain;

}


//---------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
chuck-users mailing list
chuck-users@lists.cs.princeton.edu
https://lists.cs.princeton.edu/mailman/listinfo/chuck-users