[PD] vanilla partitioned convolution abstraction

Alexandre Torres Porres porres at gmail.com
Wed Jan 9 16:44:27 CET 2019

hmm, weird, I don't seem to find problems...

Em qua, 9 de jan de 2019 às 12:10, Roman Haefeli <reduzent at gmail.com>

> On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 11:27 -0200, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> > yeah, I also get lots of glitches and artifacts with a 64 minimum
> > window. I have to increase the delay up to 50ms so I get rid of them,
> > which is kinda bad, even though it seems incredibly efficient.
> Just to clear: I'm not experiencing Pd glitches at any configured audio
> setting whatsoever. What I mean is the abstractions produces 'wrong'
> results when configured to 64. I don't understand enough to give any
> hint why 128 is still fine and 64 sounds off.
> > Brent is not using gardner's approach I assume. And what this does is
> > that it increases the window over and over in the following
> > partitions, this is why it gets so much lighter on the CPU
> Yeah. From what I gather without reading William Brent's [convolve~]'s
> source code, is that it uses n partitions with same size. At least the
> printed number seems to suggest that. Thus, using a smaller delay leads
> to a significantly increased CPU load. With Gardener's approach, the
> penalty of a short delay is almost not noticeable.
> Roman
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/attachments/20190109/cf0ae170/attachment.html>

More information about the Pd-list mailing list