[chuck-users] priorities for next release

Kassen signal.automatique at gmail.com
Fri Aug 31 06:59:56 EDT 2007

On 8/31/07, Martin Ahnelöv <operagasten at gmail.com> wrote:
> ons 2007-08-29 klockan 23:11 +0200 skrev Kassen:
> >         dur => blackhole would be exactly like SinOsc => blackhole,
> >         but with
> >         time. When you, for example, chuck second into blackhole, the
> >         shred will
> >         forward 1 second in it's own timeline (A bit like the -s
> >         otion, if I
> >         recall).
> >
> > I'm still not sure exactly how this would be different. What would
> > happen to playing Ugens that would be in the shred? Would those keep
> > computing?
> The thing is... Hm, if we have something like this:
> SinOsc 1 => dac;
> while (true) {
>         100::ms => now;
>         3::samp => blackhole;
> }
> The shred would jump 3 samples forward every 100 ms. If you change the
> duration to 10::ms, you might get some glitching going on every 100::ms.

Ok, I get it now, you'd like to jump into the future... That should be
possible but I think it will often lead to a big strain on the cpu. For
simple oscilators or a envelope it could be quite easy but if the shred
involves -say- three oscilators in a fm feedback loop there would be no way
around calculating all the samples inbetween to know what value the final
one is at after the time we skip..

It's a interesting idea but I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the dangers
and problems.

At least you could record your sounds like that, for example recording them
to a LiSa and turning record off at a certain point, advancing time, then
resuming recording at the spot where you left off.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20070831/17f01d16/attachment.htm 

More information about the chuck-users mailing list