Home News Store Community Docs
   Menu

Converting Pd Patches to ORAC Modules - Sub Patches?

Patchbox OS ORAC
#1

I’ve got the basics going thanks to @thetechnobear’s helpful video (link below). In which, Mark takes a sub-patch that is currently in a separate .pd file, and copies it into sub-patch in the Module.pd file in order to hook up the inlets and outlets. (Sorry if I’ve not got the terminology quite correct there, hopefully you know what I mean though).

My question is, do you always have to do that? I’m looking at a Pd patch with multiple .pd files - do they all have to go into Module.pd? Ideally not, as that’s quite a lot more editing down into the guts of the patch. Of course, I’ve tried keeping separate files and that’s not working.

#2

You should be able to use sub patches. Are they in the same directory as module.pd? Are you getting some errors?

Try looking at some other user modules on https://patchstorage.com/platform/orac/ to see how they’re structured.

#3

Thanks. Yes all in the same folder. No errors to view (I’ll go searching for a log), but no sound. I’ve been experimenting with simple patches/sub-patches on Windows, then porting over, so I know they basically work. Yes, I’ve been looking at other modules for guidance. Ok as long as I know it’s possible, I will persevere.

1 Like
#4

Well, I’ve worked out how to convert my own patches, including sub-patches both in the module.pd file and in external files. But I failed to convert any of the patches I found on patchstorage.com, so I clearly don’t really understand the process properly. More work needed. I suspect the loadbangs, even though I think I’ve handled them.

Still even with the default ones, which include the Mutable Instrument ports, there’s a big sound palette to explore in a little box.

#5

Indeed, loadbangs were the culprit. I guess they are put in all over the place with a typical Pd patch, and need hunting down. But back on an even keel :smile: Certainly sub-patches, either in the file or in a separate file are working, if I follow Mark’s instructions carefully about passing $ parameters around.

1 Like
#6

Could you quickly recap what has to be done about the loadbangs? :slight_smile:

#7

Each conventional pd [loadbang] object needs replacing with a receive [r loadbang-$1]. The patches made for Organelle use [r loadbang].

Issues I came across:

  1. loadbangs are often liberally sprinkled around in the patch and its possibly many sub-patches. So they all have to be hunted down and edited.
  2. When invoking a sub-patch that is in a separate .pd file e.g. [foo] then you need to supply the special ORAC parameter [foo $1]
  3. Where sub-patches are already invoked with a parameter e.g. [foo 1000] then these need changing to [foo 1000 $1]. And inside the sub-patch ‘foo’, the special parameter for ORAC is then available as $2 (or if there are already two arguments, $3 and so on).

Does that make sense?

1 Like
#8

Yes it does, thank you. :slight_smile:

#9

There’s one case I’ve not explored yet: a sub-patch inside the module.pd file, invoked with a parameter e.g.

[pd foo 100 200]

With no parameter e.g. [pd foo] then the ORAC parameter is simply available as $1 in the sub-patch. But I don’t know yet what happens in the above case. Should it be…

[pd foo 100 200 $1]

or simply

[pd foo 100 200]

I will report back when I know

#10

OK, the answer is simple - invoking sub-patches with parameters is only for ‘abstractions’ a.k.a. sub-patches in a separate .pd file, so the question should not arise.