Frank Barknecht wrote:
> Hallo,
> Phil Stone hat gesagt: // Phil Stone wrote:
>
>
>> > Frank, could you comment on the difference between these approaches? Do
>> > you think RRADical is the way to go for the long run, or is sssad a
>> > better path? I'm interested in being able to recreate fairly complex,
>> > polyphonic patches of my own design for use in live performance, and I
>> > want to be able to control just about all aspects of the sound with live
>> > or function-driven inputs (a tricky proposition when combined with
>> > polyphony AND persistence).
>> >
>> > I'm leaning towards sssad right now, because it has less reliance on
>> > externals, and I'm limited to core PD for the time being (Intel mac).
>> > But RRADical seems to embody a more ambitious and encompassing
>> > philosophy about patching and persistence - do you still see it as viable?
>>
>
> Personally I use RRADical in my patches. It is more powerful and
> mature compared to [sssad]. Expecially switching between presets on
> the fly works flawlessly in RRADical, but it's tricky to do with
> [sssad] and only pure-Pd objects currently. [sssad] however
> deliberately is kept very simple and small. For example while the core
> of RRADical/Memento is three abstractions - [commun], [originator] and
> [careGUI] - [sssad] is just a single abstraction (using some helper
> patches inside).
>
> So if you're stuck with plain Pd, you cannot use Memento currently,
> but using [sssad] will make it easy to "upgrade" later. [sssad] is
> very similar to [commun] and with some search and replace action it is
> possible to replace one with the other:
>
That's excellent news, thank you, Frank. sssad - here I come.
> All that is needed to convert a sssad abstraction to a RRADical
> abstraction is this: [sssad $1/ABC] needs to become [commun /ABC $0]
> and one needs to add an [originator $1 $0], that's all.
>
> In theory the other way around works as well, but of course one looses
> functionality.
>
> For polyphony a good trick with both Memento and sssad is to use
> abstractions that share the same $1-tagname. Attached is a little
> example with sssad.
>
And thank you for this. I don't know if the new "Tips and Tricks" wiki
is the right place, but all these little gems you post as examples ought
to get put on a web page *somewhere*. I know that I find them of
immense value in learning the intricacies and power of PD.
Phil