[PD] vanilla partitioned convolution abstraction
Alexandre Torres Porres
porres at gmail.com
Fri Jan 11 16:26:38 CET 2019
I'm investigating that as well, I get the same and my CPU is at about 10%
only...
cheers
Em sex, 11 de jan de 2019 às 12:20, Max <abonnements at revolwear.com>
escreveu:
> Interesting stuff!
> However, I have hickups in the sound (dropouts) even though the CPU load
> is around 20% only. What might cause them?
>
> m.
>
> On 11.01.19 04:14, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> > Hi Philipp, so, I checked in depth and revised your patch. Here's my
> > take on it in a similar design of my last object.
> >
> > I changed a lot of things and rewrote basically everything, so there
> > might be something funny still and things may not match, but the basic
> > stuff seem to be equivalent and the basic parameters like block size and
> > delay seem to match.
> >
> > anyway, this is also fully vanilla and the prototype is called [conv2~].
> >
> > I am precomputing the FFT, so check it out, and also check the rest as
> > I've changed much of your computations for something that's simpler I
> think.
> >
> > here's the link:
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8l85y7p1knjv2i/conv2~.zip?dl=0
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Em qua, 9 de jan de 2019 às 20:46, Philipp Schmalfuß
> > <philipp.schmalfuss at uni-weimar.de
> > <mailto:philipp.schmalfuss at uni-weimar.de>> escreveu:
> >
> > yes, i get the same glitchy tone, even worse with smaller blocksizes.
> > I wasn't aware of this, thanks for the hint! will try to fix this
> >
> >
> > Quoting Alexandre Torres Porres <porres at gmail.com
> > <mailto:porres at gmail.com>>:
> >
> > > Hi, I tested your patch with the [phasor~ 5] and with [phasor~ 1]
> > I find
> > > the issue you're bringing up gets much more evident
> > >
> > > Em qua, 9 de jan de 2019 às 14:03, Roman Haefeli
> > <reduzent at gmail.com <mailto:reduzent at gmail.com>>
> > > escreveu:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 13:44 -0200, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote:
> > >> > hmm, weird, I don't seem to find problems...
> > >>
> > >> Aha? Even with attached test3.pd patch saved along the original
> > test.pd
> > >> patch? You can compare 64 to 128 and I get a glitchy tone with a
> > >> frequency of 690 Hz (which seems to come from 44100/64).
> > >>
> > >> Have you tried other IRs than the church.wav and IR.wav?
> > >>
> > >> Roman
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Pd-list at lists.iem.at <mailto:Pd-list at lists.iem.at> mailing list
> > >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> > >> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20190111/4d645cfa/attachment.html>
More information about the Pd-list
mailing list