[PD] pd~ set audio API on linux

[Christof Ressi]

> so I solved it by starting pd processes from the shell and communicating to/from the main patch using OSC.
Yes, that's how you would typically manage independent Pd instances.

Christof

On 07.05.2023 10:00, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
> Hi IOhannes, Christof,
>
>   in my use case the subprocesses don't need to receive/send audio to
> the main process and pd~ seems to introduce additional latency so I
> solved it by starting pd processes from the shell and communicating
> to/from the main patch using OSC.
>
> In any case it's good to know about mediasettings, that seems quite
> useful.
>
> --
> Orm
>
> Am Samstag, den 06. Mai 2023 um 10:18:22 Uhr (+0200) schrieb IOhannes m zmoelnig:
>> Am 5. Mai 2023 21:57:37 MESZ schrieb Christof Ressi <info at christofressi.com>:
>>> [pd~] is designed to pipe audio through the subprocess. The code does not (or rather should not) allow the subprocess to use a real audio device. Ideally, we should disable the "audio settings" and audio API entries in the "Media" menu for subprocesses, as they don't have any meaning in this context.
>> And just for the record: of course Christof is right (like always), and with my previous answer I did not want that "mediasettings" would make things to start working magically.
>> Only if changing the audio backend is possible somehow, then "mediasettings" allowed you to do so programmatically and with a well-defined interface.
>>
>>
>> mfg.sfg.jfd
>> IOhannes
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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