Wow. OK, I guess I never tried it the "wrong" way.... ;-) just to satisfy curiosity... would downsample/upsample cause aliasing errors or not?
best, d. Claude Heiland-Allen wrote: > Too complicated, Derek! > > Ignacio, just let pd consume 147% of your cpu, stuttering merrily, and > the output of writesf~ will magically be glitch free. Pd works on a > logical clock, it hardly knows what "real" time is > > For example, I've rendered videos in Gem with sound this way, Pd > consumed ~10x my available cpu/gpu power so it took ~10x realtime to get > the output, but at the end it was all in sync. > > > Claude > > Derek Holzer wrote: >> Hi Ignacio, >> >> this should be as simple as running PD at a very low rendering >> sampling rate and recording to a file inside PD. Then take the >> resulting soundfile and convert it to the desired target sampling rate >> in a sound editor (or with sndfile-resample, etc etc...). Make sure >> your rendering sampling rate is an even division of the target >> sampling rate to avoid interpolation noise. >> >> Or am I wrong, and this would cause a lot of aliasing problems? >> >> best! >> D. >> >> Ignacio Viano wrote: >>> Hello. I need to do some heavy audio generation and processing but my >>> computer is not powerful enough to do it in real-time. In fact, I >>> just want to record it; I don't need it to be processed in real-time. >>> So, is there any way of doing this in PD? Is there any way of using >>> Pure Data in a non real-time mode and capture its output to a >>> soundfile? Thanks in advance. >> > > -- derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl ::: http://blog.myspace.com/macumbista ---Oblique Strategy # 156: "The tape is now the music" _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
