This is a general feature of procedural audio. In fact Pd plays very nice and has a fixed (predictable) cost for signal rate graphs - but a variable and unpredictable cost for message domain computation.
Proc audio eventually beats sample replay on cost because of dynamic level of detail where we get a variable (but predictable) cost for dynamically built signal graphs against a linear fixed cost for sample playback. It's an interesting bit of computer science to think about. I know from talks with EA guys that EAPd ran into some problems and its performance was not spotless. But not for the reasons you state. Andy On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 20:55:58 +0200 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Monday 09 June 2008 06:23:04 Kyle Klipowicz wrote: > > Maybe EA had better hire a genuine pro from the pd-list (wink wink). > > > > I hope that this thread takes off, since I'm curious what others think on > > the topic. Spore could be the PR break that Pd has been waiting for! > > One thing to note though is that they confessed having only used Pd to > trigger > midi events and play samples. There is no "actual sound synthesis" done by pd > in Spore, only notes and messages generation. This was mostly for efficiency > reasons, and because sound processing had to use only a predictable amount of > cpu ressources. It is likely that any other game will have similar > limitations. > > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list -- Use the source _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
