Hallo, Roman Haefeli hat gesagt: // Roman Haefeli wrote:
why doing it with expensive [vline~]? wouldn't be a [timer] as precise as [vline~]?
without having seen your patch, i'd propose something like:
[timer] | [* 44.1] <- or your SR/1000 | [int]
isn't the [timer]-version even more precise, when the [readsf~]is triggered by a [metro] or a [delay]? i mean, [vline~] has some kind of time-stamp handling, which [readsf~] hasn't afaik. so the result of [vline~]-measurement might be wrong by max. 64 samples, wouldn't it? tell me, if i am producing rubbish-theories.......
I don't have any good reasons to defend my more complicated solution against your simpler suggestion of using [timer]. ;)
But [timer] would be as precise or wrong as [vline~] as both are getting their time from the Pd clock with possibly in-block starting points, while readsf~ will start quantized to the block size, if I'm right.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org_ __goto10.org__