[PD] clone vs. dynamic patching

tim vets timvets at gmail.com
Sat Jan 18 18:30:55 CET 2020


Op za 18 jan. 2020 om 18:03 schreef Christof Ressi <christof.ressi at gmx.at>:

> I always use [clone] when I need several instances of an abstraction.
> Dynamic patching is a hack and shouldn't be used anymore for this purpose.
>
> Is there a way to make other kinds of structures inside [clone] though?
Two abstractions a and b for example, with the output of a connected to b
and b connected to [clone]s outlet,
rather than having parallel copies of one abstraction...?

> one feature badly missing is the possibility ta allocate dynamic "voice"
> > (or "instance") numbers (i.e. how many instances of an abstraction are
> > created).
>
> That would be useful and it's actually on my to-do-list :-). But usually I
> just allocate the max. number of instances I need and simply "disable"
> instances I don't need. I think this is generally the better approach for
> cloned DSP objects (using [switch~], because dynamically changing the
> number of voices wouldn't be realtime safe anyway...
>
> Christof
>
> > Gesendet: Samstag, 18. Januar 2020 um 16:46 Uhr
> > Von: "oliver" <oliver at klingt.org>
> > An: Pd-List <pd-list at lists.iem.at>
> > Betreff: Re: [PD] clone vs. dynamic patching
> >
> > João Pais wrote:
> > > Hello list,
> > >
> > > I didn't try clone yet, I always worked with dynamic patching for
> > > similar issues. For those who are knowledgeable, I would like to ask:
> is
> > > there any advantage of clone against dynamic patching when using the
> > > same circuit, or is it the same?
> > > This pertains to patches working on both control and signal
> input/output.
> > >
> >
> > if you are familiar with MAX:
> >
> > [clone] is nearly the same as [poly~]
> >
> > one feature badly missing is the possibility ta allocate dynamic "voice"
> > (or "instance") numbers (i.e. how many instances of an abstraction are
> > created). i hope miller has plans to implement this in the future.
> >
> > right now, all you can do is a combination of using [clone] and dynamic
> > patching if you want to change the number of instances on the fly
> > (destroy the old clone object and re-create it with new arguments with
> > PD messages).
> >
> > i used [clone] on several occasions and find it extremely useful, as you
> > can directly edit the original source and see the results (as opposed to
> > MAX).
> >
> > i would say the best use case is a situation, where you need let's say
> > 10 or more copies of a patch (i.e. for parameter organisation,
> > oscillator banks etc...). basically it's the same as creating multiple
> > abstractions where you do the message routing internally with a creation
> > argument
> >
> > [abs 1]
> > [abs 2]
> > [abs 3]
> > [abs 4] etc...
> >
> > so, no - there's no direct ADVANTAGE over dynamic patching but in
> > general i think it's the better and clearer concept
> >
> > best
> >
> > oliver
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20200118/1c7ea0fb/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Pd-list mailing list