I guess I've never seen a way to load multiple samples into a single array. That might solve another problem I'm currently sorting out. How do you do that?
Sam On Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 1:56 PM Matt Barber <brbrof...@gmail.com> wrote: > This is doable, actually, but not easy. [delay] and [vline~] both have > subsample accuracy. It would be substantially easier if you could > preprocess and deliver the sequence as one big message dump to [vline~]. If > you loaded all of the files into one array (up to about 6:20 of audio at > 44100) and kept tabs on where each one started and how long it was in > samples and milliseconds, you could then feed [vline~] into [tabread~] to > play the relevant chunk of the array. If you needed to be able to transpose > them, that's a little harder because depending on how long the table was, > you'd need to work in the message onset to [tabread4~]'s right inlet or > face index degradation. > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:40 PM, Samuel Burt < > composer.samuel.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> David, >> >> One thing I attempted and couldn't find a solution for was the following, >> mostly owing to the limitation of interfacing with a 64 sample block size. >> >> I wanted to have a directory of hundreds of audio recordings. Each one >> would be a single wavelength from an interesting sound, like a bass >> clarinet, marimba, harpsichord, tambourine, etc. Each would begin and end >> at a zero crossing so you could chain them together to make complex >> timbres. They could be chained in sequence, randomized, or loaded in >> meta-data-matched chunks. I ran into a problem figuring out how to trigger >> the next sound based on the ending of the last sound in a sample accurate >> way. Sound file loading or even buffer playback triggering waits until the >> start of the next block size before it updates. If you have a waveform that >> lasts 205 samples (64+64+64+13), you have a gap of 51 silent samples before >> the next waveform would start. Not only do you not get the continuous sound >> you want, this winds up creating a periodic pattern with a frequency of 689 >> Hz (44100/64). >> >> David, I like your idea "what (if anything) someone tried to do in Pd, >> but couldn't given its limitations". I think this could be a wonderful >> challenge if we could have a monthly thread like this where the best minds >> among us come up with solutions to some of the hardest conceptual >> challenges in Pd. >> >> I'm still struggling with loading dozens of files, audio dropouts, and >> other similar problems. Someone else expressed frustration about Pd's >> single-threaded status. I too have feared upgrading my computer based on >> the limitations of current multicore processors (although realistically I >> think we can all look at the "turbo-boost" level or whatever Intel calls it >> to determine where our processor might run with a demanding patch. I >> understand the fact that you can't run your audio process on multiple >> cores, because it is a linear process. It would be great if the GUI could >> run on a second core, a process that loads audio into memory could run on >> third core, while GEM could automatically run on a fourth core. I don't >> have any concept of how feasible that would be, though. Does the GUI in >> pd-l2orc run on a separate core? >> >> Sam >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Message: 4 >>> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 09:01:06 -0800 >>> From: david medine <dmed...@ucsd.edu> >>> >>> One thing I'd be interested in knowing about is what (if anything) >>> someone tried to do in Pd, but couldn't given its limitations (apart >>> from look/feel/convenience issues). >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> >>
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list