seems to be the combo of the iem filters with the [block~ 1] do you really need that small blocksize?
Yes, because if you set the delay by pitch as well as by time. But you're right - [block~ 4] works fine up to MIDI 112 (5274Hz - easily high enough for most people). I think it needed a power of 2 before it would work.
Thanks, Ed
Ed Kelly wrote:
seems to be the combo of the iem filters with the [block~ 1] do you really need that small blocksize?
Yes, because if you set the delay by pitch as well as by time. But you're right - [block~ 4] works fine up to MIDI 112 (5274Hz - easily high enough for most people). I think it needed a power of 2 before it would work.
i had a similar problem recently - but it turns out if you subpatch the delread~ and delwrite~ you can go right down to 1 sample delay even with a blocksize of 64. have a look at 3.audio.examples/G05.execution.order.pd in the help patches.
d
On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 14:58 +0100, Damian Stewart wrote:
Ed Kelly wrote:
seems to be the combo of the iem filters with the [block~ 1] do you really need that small blocksize?
Yes, because if you set the delay by pitch as well as by time. But you're right - [block~ 4] works fine up to MIDI 112 (5274Hz - easily high enough for most people). I think it needed a power of 2 before it would work.
i had a similar problem recently - but it turns out if you subpatch the delread~ and delwrite~ you can go right down to 1 sample delay even with a blocksize of 64. have a look at 3.audio.examples/G05.execution.order.pd in the help patches.
if, according to the thread title, this is about loops, the execution order forcing doesn't help, since the feedback loop forces the execution order to be first [delread~] and then [delwrite~]. you cannot go lower than one block with looping.
roman
___________________________________________________________ Der frühe Vogel fängt den Wurm. Hier gelangen Sie zum neuen Yahoo! Mail: http://mail.yahoo.de
Hallo, Damian Stewart hat gesagt: // Damian Stewart wrote:
Ed Kelly wrote:
seems to be the combo of the iem filters with the [block~ 1] do you really need that small blocksize?
Yes, because if you set the delay by pitch as well as by time. But you're right - [block~ 4] works fine up to MIDI 112 (5274Hz - easily high enough for most people). I think it needed a power of 2 before it would work.
i had a similar problem recently - but it turns out if you subpatch the delread~ and delwrite~ you can go right down to 1 sample delay even with a blocksize of 64. have a look at 3.audio.examples/G05.execution.order.pd in the help patches.
This approach doesn't work for feedback delay lines. For non-feedback delay lines G05.execution.order.pd shows how to get zero samples delay!
Ciao
Frank
On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 15:47 +0100, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Hallo, Damian Stewart hat gesagt: // Damian Stewart wrote:
Ed Kelly wrote:
seems to be the combo of the iem filters with the [block~ 1] do you really need that small blocksize?
Yes, because if you set the delay by pitch as well as by time. But you're right - [block~ 4] works fine up to MIDI 112 (5274Hz - easily high enough for most people). I think it needed a power of 2 before it would work.
i had a similar problem recently - but it turns out if you subpatch the delread~ and delwrite~ you can go right down to 1 sample delay even with a blocksize of 64. have a look at 3.audio.examples/G05.execution.order.pd in the help patches.
This approach doesn't work for feedback delay lines. For non-feedback delay lines G05.execution.order.pd shows how to get zero samples delay!
where have all the delays gone... short time passing.....
roman
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
-
Damian Stewart -
Ed Kelly -
Frank Barknecht -
Roman Haefeli