On 13-Jan-06, at 11:33 AM, Mike McGonagle wrote:
chuck sinegrain sgtest1 rec-auto
I've found that recording things in chuck is quite expensive (computationally), so I would first try it without recording. And I certainly wouldn't have four different recordings going on at once; I've find some way to only have one thread recording everything.
I did this in Pure Data, but I had to create it in such a way that there were already all the generators instantiated, so if there ever occured a moment where one more generator was needed that created, it would "steal" a generator. This occasionally produced some clicks in the resulting sound.
I did a similar thing (in chuck) using fifteen generators. In my case I had new generators wait until one was free, instead of stealing it... but you can avoid the clicks if you can give the generator a few ms notice before stealing it. When you notify a generator, have it do a fade-out, then start the new info.
Will I need to create an "array" of my objects, creating all the instances that I may need? Or should I be able to create an object, call its function, and call its function by sporking it, and then instatiate a new object using the same object reference?
sporking is relatively expensive. When I tried to do my project (with 1.2.0.2, I believe), I ran out of CPU when I have five generators going. With an array of objects (using whatever I wanted up to the array size), I could do something like fifteen or eighteen generators. Since chuck is so new, it's not very optimized. Cheers, - Graham Percival