[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: on octave dividing

At 08:28 AM 9/24/2001, jim palmer wrote:
>isn't that an octave up instead of down?


no, invert it back at each of those inflection points to get the original 
waveform:

      ...                     ....
     .   .                   .    .
    .     .                 .      .
   .       .               .        .
  .         .             .          .
.           .           .            .           .
              .         .              .         .
               .       .                .       .
                .     .                  .     .
                 .   .                    .   .
                  ...                      ...


this is now two periods, so this original is an octave higher than the 
octave divided output below.

kim


>matthias wrote:
> >...
> >A sine wave input turns the following 
> output:
> >
> >     ...         ....
> >    .   .       .    .
> >   .     .     .      .
> >  .       .   .        .
> > .         . .          .
> >.           .            .           .           .
> >                          .         . .         .
> >                           .       .   .       .
> >                            .     .     .     .
> >                             .   .       .   .
> >                              ...         ...
> >...
>
>
>
>

______________________________________________________________________
Kim Flint                     | Looper's Delight
kflint@loopers-delight.com    | http://www.loopers-delight.com