Hello, I've once made a project like this, and found out that it's better to not send interpolated data through FUDI, interpolation can be done on client's end, it saves a lot of bandwidth.
Just an idea, for sequencing events there are ways to reduce a lot the dataflow by using protocols different from MIDI sequencing. MIDI needs a very tight timecode, the amount of data is increasing with bpm and controller values. I've found one different way that is about sending a packet containing all the pattern informations that would be triggered with a simple beat clock. There is a backup of this work there: http://megalego.free.fr/pd/patko/list-sequence/ This might be suited for transmitting sequential events through network, but I haven't experimented this yet, the main idea was about interpreting tabla language: http://megalego.free.fr/pd/patko/tablas/ There you have my two cents, good luck in your project. Colet Patrice ----- Mail original ----- > De: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > À: [email protected] > Envoyé: Jeudi 8 Décembre 2011 19:19:55 > Objet: [PD] Networking patches to utilize multiple cores > > Greets. > > Is there a proper or preferred method for using any of the networking > objects in pd-extended to allow for realtime bi-directional > communication > between patches on the same computer, so as to utilize 2 or more cpu > cores? > I am currently trying to discover the best way to handle this. > > i started with netsend/netrecieve and used [route] to send > approximately 40 > or so streams as messages, and it worked, somewhat, but I think i may > have > been squeezing too much data through that one netsend as it was a bit > sluggish (running on a dual core thinkpad 1.83ghz, 3gb ram). I am > working > with 2-5ms latencies so sluggish can screw me up in performance, > especially > since i havent even added 60% of the data that will be streaming from > my > "messages" patch to my "signals" patch. I am looking at > netserver/netclient and contemplating breaking the streams up into 2 > or > more clients but i wanted to see if anyone had any advice in this > regard. > > the goal is to have a "messages" patch that would interpret all the > incoming sensor and performance data, send it to subpatches for GEM > visualizations, interpretive synth controls and looping system > parameters, > THEN, send that data to a separate patch that would house around 15 > signal > object based subpatches for synthesis, looping and effects. any > status > feedback i need from the signal objects would need to be sent back to > the > messages patch for processing and display, so a realtime, > bi-directional > solution is very important. > > insight? > > Onyx > > -- > www.onyx-ashanti.com > > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
