[spigot] in abstraction control inlet which also takes control float to [switch~]?

In general, I try to only send controls to things which are on, yes, but I have not had major issues when that still happens. This probably depends more on what the abstractions are doing and, in the case of readsf~ and spatialization algorithms, switch~ has a much greater impact.

Don't overly optimize at the beginning. :)

On Dec 9, 2021, at 10:22 AM, pd-list-request@lists.iem.at wrote:

Message: 2 Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 01:22:11 -0800 From: "Scott R. Looney" <scottrlooney@gmail.com mailto:scottrlooney@gmail.com> To: Pd-List <pd-list@lists.iem.at mailto:pd-list@lists.iem.at> Subject: Re: [PD] simple dynamic instancing and connection of abstractions Message-ID: <CAAo07Q2iV1wVBqd6PAkbGirwAT7xDDMFE0kLEYar4HvTV3go4A@mail.gmail.com mailto:CAAo07Q2iV1wVBqd6PAkbGirwAT7xDDMFE0kLEYar4HvTV3go4A@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

okay, pursuant to this idea, i'm starting into working on this design overhaul and i'm considering routing the non-audio signals to all of the instruments in a slot at once. since there will only ever be audio coming from one instrument in a slot, there certainly won't be audio conflicts, but i am a bit concerned at data going everywhere and if that creates a significant amount of overhead load for PD.

so, if i use switch~ to turn off an inactive instrument's audio output, does the control data matter if it ends up in a 'dead letter office' so to speak? or is it better to route control signals away from inactive instruments as well? for this example assume the MIDI note triggering only routes to the active instrument as well, so no audio is even triggered.

scott

Dan Wilcox @danomatika http://twitter.com/danomatika danomatika.com http://danomatika.com/ robotcowboy.com http://robotcowboy.com/