On 29 August 2012 19:53, Robin Haberkorn
Also thinking about Chugens, could someone comment on the performance aspect of using them for audio-rate processing (in comparison to a traditional 1::samp loop, e.g. in a Chubgraph)?
I think the ChubGraph just encapsulates a set of UGens. ChuGins should be about as fast as UGens. Exactly how fast that is will -of course- depend on the programmer and the compiler. How much faster a more involved GhuGin will be than a series of more simple UGens performing the same task will depend on how much this task can be simplified when we put it in a single object. I'd only do this is situations where performance is really critical or where you anticipate you'll re-use a given technique a lot. Interestingly it turned out that ChuGins can out-perform regular UGens; Caspar's interpolating delay seems to out-perform the most similar UGen. How that is possible, considering that Caspar is using more high quality interpolation is still a bit unclear. Yours, Kas.