[PD] pd~ and rpi
ift.gab at gmail.com
Mon Sep 16 21:50:22 CEST 2019
indeed, i guess i misunderstood altho im pretty sure i was getting sound
without turning on the dsp on my mac, i will check that and report back
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 9:45 PM Christof Ressi <christof.ressi at gmx.at>
> > or at least on my system and in contradiction to the documentation the
> dsp in the sub process MUST be on.... otherwise no sound
> actually, in the documentation it says:
> "We turn DSP on at load for convenience - control objects in this patch
> will still work without it (unlike in the super-process, where DSP must be
> on for time to move forward in the sub-process.)"
> this doesn't imply that you don't need to turn on DSP for audio objects -
> on the contrary!
> But are you saying on your Mac you got sound *without* DSP being turned on
> in the subprocess!? This would surprise me...
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 16. September 2019 um 21:18 Uhr
> *Von:* "iftah gabbai" <ift.gab at gmail.com>
> *An:* Max <abonnements at revolwear.com>
> *Cc:* Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> *Betreff:* Re: [PD] pd~ and rpi
> ok, it works, apparently - or at least on my system and in contradiction
> to the documentation the dsp in the sub process MUST be on.... otherwise no
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 8:35 PM iftah gabbai <ift.gab at gmail.com> wrote:
>> hey all and thanks again for the response. ive actually updated to buster
>> (incase you wonder why i havent so far, i just did not have a reason, its
>> an embedded system and it was working great until i had the idea of using
>> pd~ in order to free up the cpu) so im on 0.49 now but still no luck. a
>> simple test patch sending and osc~ out to the dac~ does not produce sound,
>> the mother patch has its dsp on (with delay and all) and i can print msgs
>> via [stdout] so the sub patch is def loading. pd~ has the following
>> arguments: [pd~ -ninsig 1 -noutsig 1 -fifo 20 -sr 48000]. it does work on
>> my mac tho. while im at it, incase i ever get it to work, the docs states
>> that the fifo latency is roundtrip in blocks. does this refer to pd block
>> size of 64 time the number of fifo that i specify in the args?
>> thanks again
>> On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:18 PM Max <abonnements at revolwear.com> wrote:
>>> On 16.09.19 12:54, Christof Ressi wrote:
>>> >> if you want to use pd~ to for example render a GEM patch you need to
>>> >> switch on dsp in the subprocess at least for a moment.
>>> > I don't think you need to do this (anymore). Control objects work fine
>>> without DSP being turned on in the subprocess, like the documentation says.
>>> OP is using 0.47 on the RPi, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>> Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
>>> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
>> _______________________________________________ Pd-list at lists.iem.at
> mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list