indeed, i guess i misunderstood altho im pretty sure i was getting sound without turning on the dsp on my mac, i will check that and report back
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 9:45 PM Christof Ressi christof.ressi@gmx.at wrote:
or at least on my system and in contradiction to the documentation the
dsp in the sub process MUST be on.... otherwise no sound
actually, in the documentation it says:
"We turn DSP on at load for convenience - control objects in this patch will still work without it (unlike in the super-process, where DSP must be on for time to move forward in the sub-process.)"
this doesn't imply that you don't need to turn on DSP for audio objects - on the contrary!
But are you saying on your Mac you got sound *without* DSP being turned on in the subprocess!? This would surprise me...
Christof
*Gesendet:* Montag, 16. September 2019 um 21:18 Uhr *Von:* "iftah gabbai" ift.gab@gmail.com *An:* Max abonnements@revolwear.com *Cc:* Pd-List pd-list@lists.iem.at *Betreff:* Re: [PD] pd~ and rpi ok, it works, apparently - or at least on my system and in contradiction to the documentation the dsp in the sub process MUST be on.... otherwise no sound
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 8:35 PM iftah gabbai ift.gab@gmail.com wrote:
hey all and thanks again for the response. ive actually updated to buster (incase you wonder why i havent so far, i just did not have a reason, its an embedded system and it was working great until i had the idea of using pd~ in order to free up the cpu) so im on 0.49 now but still no luck. a simple test patch sending and osc~ out to the dac~ does not produce sound, the mother patch has its dsp on (with delay and all) and i can print msgs via [stdout] so the sub patch is def loading. pd~ has the following arguments: [pd~ -ninsig 1 -noutsig 1 -fifo 20 -sr 48000]. it does work on my mac tho. while im at it, incase i ever get it to work, the docs states that the fifo latency is roundtrip in blocks. does this refer to pd block size of 64 time the number of fifo that i specify in the args?
thanks again
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:18 PM Max abonnements@revolwear.com wrote:
On 16.09.19 12:54, Christof Ressi wrote:
if you want to use pd~ to for example render a GEM patch you need to switch on dsp in the subprocess at least for a moment.
I don't think you need to do this (anymore). Control objects work fine
without DSP being turned on in the subprocess, like the documentation says.
OP is using 0.47 on the RPi, so ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at
mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list