[PD] Interpolation

[Josh Steiner]

Frank Barknecht wrote:

>Hallo,
>Josh Steiner hat gesagt: // Josh Steiner wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I have a question about interpolation, as in [tabread4~] vs. [tabread~] 
>>... my performance environment often has like 20-40 samplers playing 
>>simultaneously and its really beggining to bog down my cpu to the poitn 
>>where i'm getting dropouts, so i'm looking for ways of optimizing my 
>>patches.  i'm using tabread4~'s in it because i though this is more 
>>"correct" but i really dont know much about it.  how much does it really 
>>affect the sound if i am just using it as a simple sampler?  how much 
>>effeiciency gain can i expect from using non interpolated tabread?
>>    
>>
>
>Why not just try it? 
>  
>

i did and didnt notice any artifacts, but its hard to tell sometimes and 
i wouldnt want to rely on non interp. if later on i started to notice 
the artifacts :)

actualy... the cpu usage with [tabread~] and [tabread4~] is identical in 
my little test here... hrm... i wonder if there are any more effiecient 
sample players... anyone have any suggestions?  i guess i'll go try out 
xsample/xgroove...

>If you don't resample your samples, i.e. play everything at the
>same, natural speed, you won't get any artivacts at all when using
>tabread, as you don't need to interpolate at all. 
>  
>


>But if you play your samples faster or slower, 4-point interpolation
>has advantages. 
>

ok, i do play back at variing speed so looks like i should stick with 
the interp. tabread.

>I don't have any reference material at hand ATM, about
>how much the introduced noise will be, but I know, that it's discussed
>in the Dodge/Jerse "Computer Music" book. So if you can find that...
>
>ciao
>  
>

i read over MSP's chapter on interp. and all i got was a big wooshing 
sound as it shot over my head :) 


-- 
________________________________________________________________
live experimental electronic music   --   http://bluevitriol.com
independent u.s. drum'n'bass         --   http://vitriolix.com