Hello all,
I am currently investigating the idea of trying to route audio dynamically, thus allowing a set of audio modules that can be repatched on the fly. My real question concerns the idea of routing that audio to multiple destinations.
My ideas stem from working with FM synthesis, and recreating some DX algorithms. Effectively, to get around this multiple routing problem, I have created a few sub-patches with multiple [throw~] objects in it, but this gets a little cumbersome.
Ideally, I would think that [throw~] could be extended (into a new object? [mthrow~] for multi-throw?). This object would also allow for these signals to be scaled independently for each destination added.
Is there something else that already exists that allows for such a thing?
Thanks, Mike
On 01/01/13 21:46, Mike McGonagle wrote:
Ideally, I would think that [throw~] could be extended (into a new object? [mthrow~] for multi-throw?). This object would also allow for these signals to be scaled independently for each destination added.
Multiple [throw~] can sum to corresponding [catch~] Multiple [receive~]/[r~] can receive from corresponding [send~]/[s~]
Something like this might work:
| | [throw~ a] [throw~ a] ...
[catch~ a] | [send~ b]
[receive~ b] [receive~ b] ... | |
I haven't tested but it might even be fine to use the same name for both.
On 01/02/2013 04:24 PM, Claude Heiland-Allen wrote:
On 01/01/13 21:46, Mike McGonagle wrote:
Ideally, I would think that [throw~] could be extended (into a new object? [mthrow~] for multi-throw?). This object would also allow for these signals to be scaled independently for each destination added.
Multiple [throw~] can sum to corresponding [catch~] Multiple [receive~]/[r~] can receive from corresponding [send~]/[s~]
Something like this might work:
| | [throw~ a] [throw~ a] ...
[catch~ a] | [send~ b]
[receive~ b] [receive~ b] ... | |
I haven't tested but it might even be fine to use the same name for both.
yes. we've been using this idiom quite a lot. [catchsend~ foo] == [catch~ $1]->[send $1]
gfmadsr IOhannes
Grrrr! This perfectly fixes a problem I had years ago .... Why did i not make that connection back then?