I've played with it on OS X.  I was getting sound, controlling it with netsend/netreceive.  And it worked fine.  But it was hardly a definitive test.

.hc

Josh Steiner wrote:
Have you actually experimented with PD on OS-X yet?  I'm not sure how
stable it is right now, I think its only a test build. Can anyone share
their exeperiences?

-Josh

(and yes, Hans is my brother)

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

I am planning on using netsend/netreceive since they seem to do what I 
need them to and they are already part of PD. OSC would be best in the
long run, but it seems like its a bit beta still. I plan on using
multiple computers because I want to space the speakers every 75 meters
or so along the 500 m tunnel. Running audio cables 500 m isn't really
feasible, but ethernet can do 100m cable lengths. I'll have a hub or
router every 100m. (FYI: PD does support multiple audio outs).

Also, currently I am not too concerned with latency since its probably
going to be a prerecorded bit played back, rather than a live
performace. That can come later. I might choose OS X because I am
getting a bunch of Macs for this project that I might want to use for
other things in the future. Linux is an option too. I am not concerned
with the OS really since PD works for me on both platforms.

Has anyone seen anythin g like this implemented before? I am mainly
looking for examples of spacialization in such a setup, plus how to
control it all once its setup.

.hc

David Sabine wrote:

(Someone please tell me if this is post all wrong and terribly
uninformed...I'm new to this list.)

Hans-Christoph,

In terms of networking the many computers together and getting all your PD
patches to communicate, I think you could use Open Sound Control, or perhaps
the netsend and netreceive objects (native PD objects).

I found an OSC (open sound control) object and reference at
http://barely.a.live.fm/pd/OSC/

(Don the speed of your computer and the intensity of your installation, you
could consider running all the audio outputs from a single computer -- with
a multi-output soundcard. For example I've seen Digidesign hardware or
Sonorus hardware with 8 analog outputs. HOWEVER, I don't know whether PD
supports more than 2 audio outs yet ??(can somebody else answer this?)-- but
I know SuperCollider and MAX for the Macintosh do. )

Dave Sabine
dave@davesabine.com
http://www.davesabine.com/


----- Original Message -----
From: "Hans-Christoph Steiner" <hans@eds.org>
To: <pd-list@iem.kug.ac.at>
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 9:16 AM
Subject: [PD] networked multi-channel PD cluster


I am working on a sound installation in an old train tunnel and I am
using PD to control everything. But since I am a PD neophyte, I want to
ask the list for direction. Basically, my plan is to use about 8
computers spaced down the length of the tunnel, each with two speakers.
They will be networked together and running either OS X or linux.

Here is how I envision it:


(L) (R) (L) (R) (L) (R) (L) (R) (L) (R) [speakers]
\ / \ / \ / \ / \ /
master slave slave slave slave
|---------| |-------| |-------| |-------| |---... [ethernet]


All of the computers will share a pool of samples via the network. I
would like to control all of the PDs from the master computer.

For the first aspect of the installation, I would like to be able to
trigger any sample on any/all computers and even move samples down the
tunnel. The second aspect, I would like to be able to control granular
synthesis on these computers.

Does anybody know anyone who has done something like this before? With
PD? Any advice you want to offer to get me going in the right direction
would be grreatly appreciated. I am just starting with PD, but am
familiar with most of the concepts since I have a background in Csound
and programming.

.hc

--

"Man has survived hitherto because he was to ignorant to know how to

realize

his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them or
perish."

-William Carlos Williams



Hans-Christoph Steiner http://works.steinertours.com





-- 

"Man has survived hitherto because he was to ignorant to know how to realize
his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them or
perish."

-William Carlos Williams



Hans-Christoph Steiner http://works.steinertours.com




________________________________________________________________
Josh .. Yoshi .. Joschi .. xiphoidprocess.com .. eds.org/~joschi

-- 

"Man has survived hitherto because he was to ignorant to know how to realize
his wishes. Now that he can realize them, he must either change them or
perish."

-William Carlos Williams



Hans-Christoph Steiner http://works.steinertours.com