[PD] Pd sounds better than Max?

[bsoisoi]

Well, why couldn't Pd be as "clean", processors are fast enough these  
days, and one could always crank up the sample rates of their DSP  
blocks.  Isn't the internal resolution at least 32bit anyway (is it  
64bit under any circumstances?)

cheers,
~brandon


On Mar 8, 2008, at 4:25 PM, Andy Farnell wrote:

> On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 16:08:45 -0500
> marius schebella <marius.schebella at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Frank Barknecht wrote:
>>> Hallo,
>>> Andy Farnell hat gesagt: // Andy Farnell wrote:
>>>
>>>> Both use the same patch (the undulating diffraction effect). It's
>>>> comparable because I translated the Csound version directly to  
>>>> Pd, both
>>>> are 64 oscillator banks and it's clear that the Csound one  
>>>> sparkles while
>>>> the Pd one sounds a bit muddy.
>>>
>>> Csound also is known as "CleanSound" in some circles.
>>
>> so why is then "pure" data not equally clean?
>> marius.
>
>
> Because it's optimised for real-time performance.
>
> Max/Pd strike a careful balance between for real-time capability.
> The amazing sound quality of Csound comes about because it was  
> designed
> for offline rendering, and it got realtime by dint of increased CPU  
> speeds.
>
> Like the difference between a 3D games engine and rendering a  
> raytracing
> scene in 3DMax.
>
> In a way, it's not really a fair comparison at all, or at least we  
> could
> say "what did you expect?!"
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>
> -- 
> Use the source
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list