Thank you, Kas, for the insights:
> Somewhere about a year ago or so there
was a fair amount of talk on the list about using arrays of floats to record
to,
> then chuck values in them to
Impulse or Step once per sample. That might be a interesting place to start, you
could do some
> variations on Karplus-Strong using
that. You could also implement anything found in texts on DSP or your own
concoctions doing it
> this way but be prepared to spend a
lot of time optimising. Do use Gain in it's various modes for all
multiplications at sample-rate;
> this realy saves a lot of cpu time at the expense of some
readablity.
ok, I will search the archives. However, DSP code fragments
is exactely what I thought to
do. Some 15 years ago I coded on DSP level, but since than lost track of
all those new chip types, developement kits etc... also, compiling and uploading
code to a chip (I had to burn EPROMS for every little change in those days)
is not as efficient as klicking on "Replace Shred" in the
Mini..--)))
Question: would it be possible to give rough numbers
of processing "costs" for each operation of ChucK? (not right now, but in some
later revision of the manual). I remember in those very thick books about the
DSP assembler language they always gave some kind of DSP cycles per operation,
helping us to optimize code and maybe use 100 "dumb" instructions instead of 1
elegant, but enormousely DSP intensive...
>for moments when this
method sounds like real fun.
YES!