[PD] tabread4~ interpolation revisited

[Christof Ressi]

> bleeding from the interpolation artefacts audible in almost every second
> composition.

in your specific cases, are the artifacts really caused by the interpolation scheme or rather a product of indexing [tabread4~] with large floats (instead of using the second inlet)?

if it is really the interpolation, would you mind sharing sound examples? I'm genuinely curious.

> At that time a lot of list members agreed that it might be great to
> switch interpolation algorithms in tabread4~ with an argument or
> message to the object.

Sounds like a nice feature!

Only tangentially related, but we might want to add a [rate( message for [tabplay~]. [tabplay~] can play arbitrarly large arrays without precision issues while with [tabread4~] this is only possible with complicated abstractions. I've made my personal version of [tabplay~] which allows to change the playback speed at message rate and I've found it *very* useful.

Christof

> Gesendet: Sonntag, 02. Juni 2019 um 16:58 Uhr
> Von: "Peter P." <peterparker at fastmail.com>
> An: pd-list <pd-list at iem.at>
> Betreff: [PD] tabread4~ interpolation revisited
>
> Hi list,
>
> having asked my students to compose pieces in Pd using audio data in
> tables and reading them via tabread4~ my ears are still slightly
> bleeding from the interpolation artefacts audible in almost every second
> composition. Surely, everyone likes to slow down playback and I think it
> should be possible without too many audible artifacts in Pd.
>
> There is this legendary discussion on this list
> https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-06/062864.html
> after Cyrille kindly posted about his tabread4c~ external. He also
> pointed out more elaborate interpolation schemes such as in
> https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-06/063221.html
> At that time a lot of list members agreed that it might be great to
> switch interpolation algorithms in tabread4~ with an argument or
> message to the object. As far as I can tell no additional interpolation
> got implemented until today. Am I correct here?
>
> The issue got briefly revisited two years later in 2010
> https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2010-03/077232.html
> and raised by me again in 2015
> https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2015-05/110312.html
> https://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2015-06/110751.html
> after which I switched to supercollider for the specific project I was
> working on at that time as it performed better at slow playback.
>
> What could be a possible way to get slow playback from tables with less
> artifacts? (I am tempted to add "in 2019") ;)
>
> Thank you for all ideas and comments!
> P
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>