[PD-dev] [partconv~] limitations

[Gloria Dal Santo]

Hi everyone,

After playing with partconv~ in other to implement a patch for sound externalization I am asking myself whether what I am trying to do is maybe too much for pure data or not.

To sum up, I need to convolve a sound file with a BRIR that is updated whenever the listener moves his head, so that to simulate a fixed sound source.
I already have a dataset of 36 impulse responses, each of size 8192 samples.

[partconv~] allows to change the impulse response by sending a [set ir_name( message. (For [convolve~] the message would be [set ir_name( ).
Unfortunately, as soon as I send the [set _ ( message the audio stopes for a little while. Why is it so? I tried to dig into the code and I guess is simply because the buffers are freed when the set method is called.

I tried to define larger buffers so that I can store multiple BRIRs and have access to them without freeing the buffers (even though extra care must be taken in the perform method) but I think I don’t have enough coding skills to do that.

I then tried to use 5 [partconv~]s for each channel (thus 10 [partconv~]s) running at the same time with different BRIRs and multiplexing between them.
The idea is that of switching between the outputs of the [partconv~] that are not updating their BRIRs, while one of the [partconv~] is actually updating it according to the direction of the head.
To achieve this I’m using the [mux~] object.
The idea seems working, but it actually doesn’t. When I switch  between [mux~]  inputs sometimes I get clicks. On the spectrogram these look like vertical lines of constant values (like noise).
What could be the reason? Do you think that having 10  [partconv~] running at the same time is too much?

Thank you in advance for your time,
With my best regard,

Gloria

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-dev/attachments/20210503/c950fedf/attachment.htm>