So I know that the amount of bands you assign to an FFT needs to be a power of 2, but when I go over 2^14 (16384) to 2^15 (32768) bands, I get the fft.analyze(spectrum) code highlighted and the error code - ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException. Is this a limitation of hardware, processing or something else? Is there a way around this? There are many more frequencies than 16384 so this is really inconvenient.

Example code of the problem below.

import processing.sound.*;
SinOsc sin;
FFT fft;
int bands = 16384; //32768 is out of bounds.
float[] spectrum = new float[bands];
void setup() {
sin = new SinOsc(this);
fft = new FFT(this, bands);
fft.input(sin);
}
void draw() {
}
void mouseReleased() {
sin.stop();
sin.play(440, 1);
fft.analyze(spectrum);
}

hi, seems like i could not help you Frequencies not adding up here,
with a explanation about bands, sorry.

now for this question, yes, for speed that DFT is done in
array with integer pointer, using integer values
( and not double or floating point â€¦) so the band limit on your computer seems reasonable.

again, processing is not doing a FFT, it just sends a sample array
and when you set ( using sound lib )
bands = 512;
it sends 1024 sample batches
and your FFT shows your 440Hz as a max on about band 10.
here some tests of your modified code ( show print FFT )

// pls set :
int bands = 512;
// and test:
// Hz
// 50 in band 1
// 440 in band 10
// 10,000 in band 232
// 20,000 in band 464 of 512 *

( * my computer/sound card or my ears not work for this )

so 512 bands is what you have to use.

actually when you complain about frequency resolution of FFT
it should be on the low range ( < 50Hz ) if that is a issue.

using sound lib
bands 16384 is bands,
it sends a array what is 32768 samples long
to the system to make a DFT.
and gets back a array of 16384 amplitudes
where [0] is kind of offset/average of all below the frequency
with a amp in [1].
soâ€¦ what is that (lowest ) frequency [1] in that case ??

if your signal is 44kHz it has 44000 samples in one second,
so 32768 samples are 0.74 seconds
so in [1] is a amplitude for a 1.3Hz sinus

and your highest?
in [16383] 22kHz.

longer arrays seems not possible.

and as i show you with
bands = 512 you can see also frequencies up to 22kHz
and that is all a FFT can do on a signal with 44kHz
( sampling theorem )
and the number of bands can not change anything about that.

i think you still mix up bands and frequencies?
or i misunderstand your question?

Ok, I think I actually get the difference with regards to the bands now. The amount of times the original clip is sampled by the FFT is double the band amount, yes? Iâ€™ve been doing the calculation right, but just didnâ€™t seem to get what was going on.

But youâ€™re saying spectrum[0] is not the amp of the lowest frequency, but the amp of the average frequency?

What Iâ€™m up toâ€¦ is something over my head. Trying to figure out how to perfectly recreate sound samples in a format thatâ€™s very easy to manipulate.

I guess I should ask whatâ€™s the most basic way to produce a sound from the PC? I thought it was with a sine wave, but I think itâ€™s just power over time (and the resulting frequencies), but not sure at the moment how you play power.

no, it is a offset, but as frequencies below [1]
are also seen es partial offset.
even more difficult,
if a sinus fits into a band you get one peak,
and [0] and all other bands show 0.
if the sample batch is out of phase with that sinus
( what is normal ) you get a distribution ( also [0] not 0 )

think of like your sample show a cosinus instead of a sinus?
you think FFT would not see it?
it recreates it by give you amplitudes for several sinus what would add up to that cosinus.
( ok, no problem, ignore it )

back to your point:
you want create easy sound with processing sound lib
and use the

good.

when you analyze a
sound sample with a FFT and
want recreate that you must use a INVERSE FFT
( sound lib not show

With regards to SinOsc, the way Iâ€™ve read it, a single sample doesnâ€™t represent any particular frequency, itâ€™s only when they accumulate over time that they create a frequency and tone, and so I was wondering if theirâ€™s a more basic way to output a sound than using an Oscillator. Iâ€™ve actually tried with a Sine Oscillator and had some success, though the result is limited by the draw framerate and amount of oscillators that can be used at once, so thatâ€™s why Iâ€™m looking for something more basic. I think the link above might be doing that.

i not know what post of that topic you linked you ref to,
but i not see how that fits to FFT.

i have no idea if you can do it online with processing,
but from theory yes, you can make FFTs from a sample sound
and manipulate the AMPs and recreate the sound.
a example would be a very good FILTER to disable one specific
frequency ( noise? ) instead of a semi analog filter.

but for now start just with making sound by adding sinus of different frequencies.

By â€śvery easy to manipulateâ€ť â€¦ what do you mean? Easy to change the amplitude, or pitch? Easy to pan in stereo? Easy to reverse / pause / speed / slow?

Digital computers are great at â€śperfectly recreate.â€ť Unless there is a pseudo-random element, any algorithmic digital sound generation methods are going to produce the same results every time (for one piece of given hardware, of course). Unless Iâ€™m not understanding you, and you are talking about something like recording external audio for playback into a lossless encoding formatâ€¦?

I mean being able to take an audio clip, capture all its individual samples (ex. 44100 * secs of clip), and perform any type of modulation to those samples over time. For example, if I captured a light touch on a guitar string, a medium strike, and a full-force heavy strike, I could examine how the samples between them change over time, and be able to modulate any amount between those states. For example. 2/3rds of the way to medium strike. Also it would be nice if I could pan each sample individually or each frequency instead, but Iâ€™m not sure how possible that is or if itâ€™s supper intense on computing. Lots of question marks you see, which is why Iâ€™m trying to do this bit by bit and not overloading the forum with questions, heh.