yeah, so of course you ramp down the signal using line~ or vline~ before the switch.
anyway, you need to do that to avoid discontinuities in the signal.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Roman Haefeli reduzent@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 2011-10-21 at 19:02 +0900, i go bananas wrote:
here's a quick example with throw~ and catch~
This is actually a good example of how difficult / impossible it is to make it really glitch free with [send~ ] / [receive~ ], [throw~ ] and [catch~ ] respectively.
During one block, you get weird results when switching. Check attached patch (your simpleRouting.pd with a grapher).
Roman
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Roman Haefeli reduzent@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, 2011-10-20 at 23:48 -0400, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
I think the way you'd do it to prevent glitches is to have them in subpatches, always attached, and then turn them on and off with a
[*~]
and a [switch~].
How are you gonna patch this without creating DSP loops?
Roman
On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:44 PM, patrick wrote:
hi everyone,
i would like to make a patch with multiple fx~ _but_ is it possible
to
chain the fx~ and change the order without a single glitch in the
dsp.
as an example:
[adc~] | [reverb~] | [distortion~] | [dac~]
now pressing a bang and automagically:
[adc~] | [distortion~] | [reverb~] | [dac~]
is it possible in pd? thanks, pat
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
"[W]e have invented the technology to eliminate scarcity, but we are deliberately throwing it away to benefit those who profit from scarcity." -John Gilmore
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list