[PD] Pure Data Buffir~ object
Alexandre Torres Porres
porres at gmail.com
Sat Sep 5 23:58:19 CEST 2015
Hmm, so you say the object will compute the maximum table size no matter if
we're using just, say, 128 samples? Even if the arraysize of the impulse
response is just 128? As if it would always consume more CPU even with the
same smaller impulses?
I wonder how things work internally with [FIR~].
It is true that convolution is quite expensive. In the frequency domain it
is better, but it has it's own complications. The best solution is actually
"partitioned convolution". In Pd we have [partconv~] for that, which has a
couple of issues, but it is great. So you can use it for spending the same
as a maximum of 256 buffer size for impulses that are 4096 or even greater.
Unfortunately, Max does not have a partitioned convolution object, I think
that there had to be one... but whatever...
Anyway, I don't believe 4096 is such a costy even if doing this increases
cmputation time. And we still have other options like [partconv~] and
[FIR~] in Pd. But in practice I think we'll have [buffir~] as a better/more
versatile object/option than [FIR~] in the end. So we have more to gain
than lose with this.
> Hopefully coming week, because after that, I'll be busy
> with work-related issues.
Thanks! So, I can see how maintaining this library is not an easy task. I
care about it a lot, as I've been recently using it to teach Max, and now
that extended reached a dead end I believe it's one of the main libraries
to be taken seriously and expand Pd. So I'm trying to get a friend of mine
onboard with this, he's a teacher at a university and might be able to have
students helping in a project. His name is Flavio and he's copied here. We
were talking about writing a project to get some support for this project.
I keep finding issues with objects as I try them, so I still think there
might be a lot more to fix. I'm about to write another email on issues with
[matrix~]. And I also think we could clone some more objects. Hopefully
this happens and we'll have more support to take care of this library, huh?
cheers
2015-09-05 18:36 GMT-03:00 Fred Jan Kraan <fjkraan at xs4all.nl>:
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> On 2015-08-30 08:41 AM, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> > Howdy, hope you had a nice vacation buddy ;)
>
> Yes, thank you. It took some time to buffir~, but here we are :-).
> >
> >> There are no other serious issues with buffir~?
> >
> > haven't really played with it extensively, did try i t a bit and seemed
> > alright.
> >
> >> A first glance it doesn't look too complicated, but I think it would be
> >> good to retain the current buffer size as default, and add the larger
> >> size as an extra argument or message.
> >
> > I wonder why, since you already specify the table size in the object as
> > arguments. Doesn't make much sense to me adding up another argument if
> > I'm using a larger IR table. I guess the only difference would to change
> > the help file and say "max size is 4096" instead of "256".
>
> The second argument is the number of samples to be used in the
> convolution, not the size of the buffer, which is external. The first
> argument is an offset in the used buffer.
>
> >
> >> Maybe creating a separate object, like buffir4k~, somewhere
> >> outside cyclone would be the easier option.
> >
> > Why would it be easier? It wouldn't conflict. Once you had a newer
> > version working, that's it, no hard and no harm done.
> >
> > Maybe that concern seems like making a big effort to not expand the
> > buffir~ object, which I fail to see why. If you have a working version
> > that allows bigger tables, there's no compatibility issues or anything,
> > you're just able to get more out of it. So what would the concern be?
> >
> > But I also have to say that there already exists an external that allows
> > up to 4096 table sizes, that's [FIR~], from iemlib. So we wouldn't
> > really have to do that at all... And, yeah, I knew about [FIR~] before,
> > my request wasn't towards the necessity of a better and unavailable
> > external object that'd do that, it was just a concern to make [buffir~]
> > in cyclone as useful as I think it should be (let me stress and state
> > that I believe 256 is really too tiny and restricting).
>
> Buffir~ uses convolution in the time-domain, meaning using much larger
> buffer sizes isn't interesting performance wise, the local expert told
> me. Better performance can be reached using frequency domain filtering.
> But from the educational point of view, it is better to let the user
> decide which method is best, and change the BUFFIR_MAXSIZE value.
>
> Hopefully coming week, because after that, I'll be busy with
> work-related issues.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Fred Jan
> >
> > With the situation now that the development of extended ceased, and with
> > the great work you've been doing taking care of cyclone (and also making
> > it easily available into the deken plugin), I think all the objects in
> > cyclone need attention, even if there are alternatives to it. The way I
> > see [buffir~] now is that it is not useful, and that I'd rather use
> > [FIR~] instead. But I wish I could rely on cyclone for it without
> > needing to install a whole other library looking for alternatives of
> > features that an object from cyclone should have.
> >
> > I just think that if it isn't hard to expand it, and if it'd be working
> > after that, then no more worries :)
> >
> > what do you say?
> >
> > who else would be with me ;) ?
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > 2015-08-29 10:54 GMT-03:00 Fred Jan Kraan <fjkraan at xs4all.nl
> > <mailto:fjkraan at xs4all.nl>>:
> >
> > Hi Alexandre,
> >
> > > hey, how is going with this object?
> >
> > Not much, I just returned from vacation ;-).
> > >
> > > I just wanted to say it'd be really good if it was updated to max
> size
> > > of 4096, which is the current configuration since max 6
> > >
> > > 256 is just too little and made more sense back in the day of max 5
> > >
> > > hopefully it's an easy update, what do you say?
> >
> > A first glance it doesn't look too complicated, but I think it would
> be
> > good to retain the current buffer size as default, and add the larger
> > size as an extra argument or message.
> > Maybe creating a separate object, like buffir4k~, somewhere outside
> > cyclone would be the easier option.
> >
> > There are no other serious issues with buffir~?
> > >
> > > cheers
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Fred Jan
> > >
> > > 2015-08-01 15:18 GMT-03:00 Fred Jan Kraan <fjkraan at xs4all.nl
> <mailto:fjkraan at xs4all.nl>
> > > <mailto:fjkraan at xs4all.nl <mailto:fjkraan at xs4all.nl>>>:
> > >
> > > Hi Julian,
> > >
> > > Thank you for your report. I am not the expert, just one of
> > the current
> > > maintainers if the cyclone set of objects. I think the object
> > works, but
> > > maybe not as the Max object. If this is the case I will try to
> > fix it.
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I am sorry to bother you but I have an important question
> > about the
> > > > buffir~ object.
> > > > I hope you can help me with this. I am not too experiencd
> > with PD
> > > but I
> > > > try to make
> > > > an Binaural-Renderer. I want to use the buffir~ object to
> > convolve
> > > an IR
> > > > to a signal.
> > > > This works right now. But I want to change the IR used for
> > convolving
> > > > with the signal
> > > > when the head orientation changes. I had a look at the
> MAX/MSP 5
> > > > documentation
> > > > as I understand this object was taken from MAX where the
> buffir~
> > > object
> > > > can be told
> > > > to change the buffer~ object by using the set message. I
> > tried this in
> > > > PD but nothing
> > > > happens. Obviously the IR is not loaded as there is no
> > signal passing
> > > > through the
> > > > buffir~ object when using $1 as the name of the table and
> send a
> > > message
> > > > [set tablename]
> > > > to input 1 (the signal input where the clear message can be
> > > applied). Is
> > > > this function
> > > > not implemented in the PD buffir~ object? Or is there
> > something I
> > > do wrong?
> > >
> > > Note '$1' is not literary part of the name, just a placeholder
> > of the
> > > first element on the message (=list) you send to the object. If
> > > something is wrong here, the console should contain an error
> > message.
> > > Also see the help on $-variables.
> > > >
> > > > I would be verry happy if could help me with this question!
> > If this is
> > > > not implemented
> > > > and can't be worked around do you have any ideas how to
> solve my
> > > problem?
> > > > Thank you very much in advance!
> > >
> > > The attached patch is an adaptation of the help-patch,
> including a
> > > second buffer to switch to. Yo need to open it and draw
> > non-zero values
> > > to get a signal through. It looks like you also have to
> > provide the
> > > offset and length arguments, as leaving them out results in
> zero -
> > > meaning no useful convolution takes place.
> > >
> > > When I have time, I'll check the behaviour of the Max5 object.
> > It might
> > > work better or more user friendly. But first on the planning
> > are some
> > > weeks vacation :-).
> > > >
> > > > Regards Julian Jochheim
> > > >
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > >
> > > Fred Jan
> > >
> > > P.S. I added the pd-list in the reply, the main forum for
> > issues like
> > > this one (http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list).
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Pd-list at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> > <mailto:Pd-list at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list at lists.iem.at>> mailing
> list
> > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20150905/efcb5656/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list