Hi, i have a patch that uses the radcrusher abstraction. I have 2 tabread's reading values from tables and controlling the bitcrusher parameters, both overlap and resample.
Ive discovered that when the bitcrusher parameters are changed while writesf~ is recording the recording stops. The recording only stops when i change the bitcrusher parameters, if the bitcrusher parameters are not moved, it works fine.
Any idea why is this? how can i solve this problem?
Im on macosx using 0.43.4 extended. cheers
R.
Hi Ronni,
On 20/11/14 04:31, Ronni Montoya wrote:
Any idea why is this? how can i solve this problem?
My guess is something to do with changing blocksize using block~. Would help if you posted the abstractions.
You can accomplish both bitcrushing and downsampling without affecting the actual blocksize Pd is running at by using samphold~ and wrap~.
Cheers,
Chris.
Hi Chris , you mean using samphold~ and wrap~ instead of the bitcrusher abstraction? How can i use those objects for bitcrushing?
I attached this patch so you can see the problem.
cheers
2014-11-19 19:24 GMT-08:00, Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx:
Hi Ronni,
On 20/11/14 04:31, Ronni Montoya wrote:
Any idea why is this? how can i solve this problem?
My guess is something to do with changing blocksize using block~. Would help if you posted the abstractions.
You can accomplish both bitcrushing and downsampling without affecting the actual blocksize Pd is running at by using samphold~ and wrap~.
Cheers,
Chris.
my cheap take on a bitcrusher :) I notice that samphold~'s sampling rate should stay below 44.1 kHz or it will not output anything anyone care to explain why exactly?
2014-11-20 16:18 GMT+01:00 Ronni Montoya ronni.montoya@gmail.com:
Hi Chris , you mean using samphold~ and wrap~ instead of the bitcrusher abstraction? How can i use those objects for bitcrushing?
I attached this patch so you can see the problem.
cheers
2014-11-19 19:24 GMT-08:00, Chris McCormick chris@mccormick.cx:
Hi Ronni,
On 20/11/14 04:31, Ronni Montoya wrote:
Any idea why is this? how can i solve this problem?
My guess is something to do with changing blocksize using block~. Would help if you posted the abstractions.
You can accomplish both bitcrushing and downsampling without affecting the actual blocksize Pd is running at by using samphold~ and wrap~.
Cheers,
Chris.
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-
Chris McCormick -
Ronni Montoya -
tim vets