[PD] cheaper bonk~ replacement ?

William Brent william.brent at gmail.com
Sat Apr 10 15:44:51 CEST 2010

Hi Tim,

If you can afford to lose some time resolution, you could change
bonk~'s -hop argument to match the window size.  I think it defaults
to a hop that's half the window size.  That should be half as many

Is there any chance [env~] and a threshhold would be good enough in
your situation?  It's a lot cheaper, but as you probably know, much
more prone to false attack reports.

Hope that helps,

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM, tim vets <timvets at gmail.com> wrote:
> hello,
> I'm trying to optimize a patch to run it at the lowest possible latency.
> There is a subpatch with 6 bonk~ objects in it.
> This seems to be quite heavy on the cpu.
> As soon as I switch it on i get crackles.
> Is there a cheaper alternative to track attacks ?
> gr,
> Tim
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

William Brent

“Great minds flock together”
Conflations: conversational idiom for the 21st century


More information about the Pd-list mailing list