OK, now I've got it. This can be explained! It especially makes sense with the old "infinite looping" counter patch:
[f]X[+ 1]
where [+ 1] gets sent to the hot rather than the cold inlet of [f]. It wouldn't be such a problem if it only counted on signal blocks, but it actually counts as fast as the CPU will let it.
Great, concept is clear, I can continue!
best, d.
IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Derek Holzer wrote:
So now that I've been told that actually DSP objects are "slower", it shakes up my world view a bit, so I'm looking for new metaphors to get it back together ;-)
all the "slower" vs "faster" is non-sense.
signals are handled in a _synchronous_ way (they have to process 44100 samples per second; synchronized with the soundcard); they do this continuosly (once you have started the audio-engine they will process 44100 samples/sec until the end of the world, or the audio engine gets stopped)
messages are handled in an _asynchronous_ way: "they happen on demand!"; they might occur every now and then; two messages might occur at the same logical time,...
so all in all, messages are way more powerful than signals.
unfortunately, CPU is not. that is one reason, why the oh-so-powerful messages are not used for signal processing.
mfg.asdr IOhannes