# The structure and intended use cases for the corpus analysis abstractions

**URL:** <https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/the-structure-and-intended-use-cases-for-the-corpus-analysis-abstractions/842>\
**Category:** Usage Questions\
**Created:** [March 19, 2021, 1:11pm UTC](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/the-structure-and-intended-use-cases-for-the-corpus-analysis-abstractions/842 "2021-03-19T13:11:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![rodrigo.constanzo](https://discourse.flucoma.org/user_avatar/discourse.flucoma.org/rodrigo.constanzo/32/12_2.png) [@rodrigo.constanzo](https://discourse.flucoma.org/u/rodrigo.constanzo)\
**Post date:** [March 21, 2021, 6:47pm UTC](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/the-structure-and-intended-use-cases-for-the-corpus-analysis-abstractions/842/12 "2021-03-21T18:47:31Z")

</div>

> [@tremblap](#):
>
> It’s not a bug, it is a ‘feature’ of the output being driven by the maxNumCoeff. Eventually, we might be able to fix this on Max…

I guess I misunderstood. Is there some _other_ hard baked value elsewhere? I manually edited the underlying `mfcc-gui.maxpat` to have a higher `maxnumcoeff` but I still get the zeros:

 ![Screenshot 2021-03-21 at 6.45.05 pm](https://discourse.flucoma.org/uploads/default/original/2X/e/ecaf8f86a0c6931b594a93a2e4eca99b967e5c88.jpeg)

As in, the `fluid.bufmfcc~` object is now this:  
`fluid.bufmfcc~ 40 @features #0tmp.mfccs @blocking 0 @numchans 1 @minfreq 200 @maxfreq 10000`

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/the-structure-and-intended-use-cases-for-the-corpus-analysis-abstractions/842)._