[PD] Using PD in a non real-time mode?

[Derek Holzer]

Thanks Roman! Claude was right, my way is too complicated. But I'm happy 
to know the specifics.

Cheers!
D.

Roman Haefeli wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-05 at 12:24 +0200, Derek Holzer wrote:
>> Wow. OK, I guess I never tried it the "wrong" way.... ;-)  just to 
>> satisfy curiosity... would downsample/upsample cause aliasing errors or not?
>>
>> best,
>> d.
> 
> let's say:
>  - you record at 24k, aiming for a result at 48k
>  - all time  variables (metro, delay, etc) are doubled
>  - all frequencies are halved, respectively 12 is subtracted
>    from all pitches.
> then you wouldn't even have to resample the result, but it would be
> sufficient to simply change the samplerate field in the header from
> 24'000 to 48'000. you wouldn't have any artifacts at all in this case. 
> 
> if you simply record at 24k without all the modifications in your patch
> as described above and if you resample the rendered result to 48k, you
> probably would have a bit artefacts, but what is much worse: you cannot
> increase the quality of your recording by upsampling it. it will still
> sound the same (as with the lower samplerate) and it would be lacking
> all frequencies above 12k. so: yeah, it is definitely recommended,
> whenever possible, to do offline rendering in pd, even if it uses more
> than 100% cpu.
> 
> roman
>  
> 
> 
> 		
> ___________________________________________________________ 
> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
> 
> 

-- 
derek holzer ::: http://www.umatic.nl ::: http://blog.myspace.com/macumbista
---Oblique Strategy # 2:
"A line has two sides"