On Mon, 2012-07-16 at 01:29 -0400, Ivica Ico Bukvic wrote: > > If per-sample control is what you crave, you can either mess with sig_vs > message to pd (or whatever it is, can't remember it off top my head) and > deal with the cpu overhead, design your control entirely in signal land, > or go with something like chuck programming language (which also has a > considerably higher cpu footprint for the same reasons).
Pd does indeed provide an infrastructure for sub-sample accurate control message timing. You don't have to adjust the block size to 1 (which would still be only sample accurate, besides being utterly expensive). Roman _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
