[chuck-users] Help!

Kassen signal.automatique at gmail.com
Sun Jan 20 16:50:31 EST 2008

On 20/01/2008, mike clemow <gelfmuse at gmail.com> wrote:
> It seems that with both miniAudicle and the command line it doesn't
> seem to matter what I have my system sample rate set at.
> chuck --srate44100 foo.ck
> works as well as
> chuck --srate48000 foo.ck
> Currently my system is using 44100.  Do I have the syntax right?  Is
> chuck ignoring me or is my system ignoring Chuck?

Ok. I'm not intimately familiar with Apple's system for this but I would
imagine they would normally allow a client (like ChucK) to set such things,
that would make sense.

Could it be that at the time of this incident there was another program
running that had set the host rate to something and so the host was stuck at
that despite ChucK trying to change it? I'm making this up as I go along but
that would make sense to me. Perhaps a mp3 player? I think system sounds
might also make such claims to the host?

Your syntax here looks fine to me and I think ChucK will complain if you
mistype. What could've happened is a typo, for example a extra zero, that
would've made it incompatible by accident? (I know I make such typos....)

Also, unless you are sure what you are doing and have a specific purpose for
it I would stick to 44.1K. 48 is clearly better on it's own (it's more....)
but the higher resolution isn't worth the artefacts of down-sampling if you
ever decide to burn a CD of your work. Even established, professional and
expensive packages often make of mess of that so I recommend sticking to CD
quality and going to double or four times that if you need higher resolution
for some purpose, and steering clear of 48 and it's multiples unless you are
sure that's a good idea.

Oh, well, let's hope it's gone now.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20080120/97bbb703/attachment.htm 

More information about the chuck-users mailing list