On 03/13/2015 09:23 PM, Martin Peach wrote:
Yes I just realized .00756ms is three times the sample rate, so the "control rate" is faster than the sample rate. Makes sense now. Does it make sense for that to be possible though? What use is it?
like: upsampling to an arbitrary rate, doing some weirdo processing and downsampling again¹?
seriously: i don't think that your *new* question makes much sense. the strong point of software like Pd is making things possible that no one has thought that they would make "sense". that's why it is useful in the arts. that's why it is useful in science.
gfmsard IOhannes
¹ you wouldn't need to *actually* process your new samples at any fixed rate; you would most likely re-block them and then batch-process them each dsp-tick; so it's really an artificial and bad example.
so another attempt: just use it to generate signals in the ordinary "fs/2 domain" (at least this is how i teach my students to generate rectangle signals); now "fs/2" could be virtually any number, and .007ms @ 192kHz is no longer "three times the sample rate".