this is a cool topic. i tried out some code here:
http://www.audionerd.com/projects/pd/patches/example-fx_rack.pd
i treat the effects similar to voices in a polyphonic synthesizer. inside each effect subpatch voice there is a "through" from the previous voice along with a signal going to the audio process. when the audio process is [switch~]ed off, the "through" is enabled, allowing a bypass. that [switch~] i mentioned is inside a subpatch WITHIN the effect voice subpatch. this sub-subpatch is where your actual effects processing is housed.
that was a horrible explaination, so you may want to just look through the patch... !
there is some weirdness, but i like it as a quick example of what can be done...
it occured to me while writing this that i should be using frank's memento stuff. it also occured to me that it helps to organize subpatch names by their OSC names, so my distortion subpatch was called [pd /fx/distortion] (could probably just be "/distortion" within "/fx"...) ... what if Pd could recognize a signifier like this, and automatically route messages to subpatches and abstractions and so forth?
and as to grammar: it's late! cut me some slack!
e
patrick wrote:
hi all,
what is the best way to do an audio effect rack? in example :
inlet~ | [x] - distortion [x] - delay [x] - eq | outlet~
so you can put a disto + a delay +... for saving cpu, i want to turn [switch~] on/off for each effects. but when turning switch~ to off, the audio isn't passed to other effects. is there an alternative?
patrick
PD-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://iem.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list