On Fri, 2010-11-26 at 02:10 +0100, João Pais wrote: > how about removing the expXXX numbers, and use only concrete floats?
? Can you elaborate on this? What are 'expXXX' numbers and what are 'concrete floats'? Anyway, I think the solution would be to use 64bit float as the index. In 64-bit Pd, this isn't an issue anymore (or more correct: It will be with _much_ larger tables). Roman > or is > there any software reason that doesn't let that happen? > > > On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Derek Holzer wrote: > > > >> And keep in mind that sound quality goes down as file size goes up. > >> This is because of the interpolation. You might do better cutting your > >> file up and putting it into several different arrays. > > > > Oh, and isn't it the case that [tabread~] 0.42 has an extra inlet for > > the purpose of getting more precision ? The read point is now relative > > to a message-rate setting. > > > > If you have to play a very large file in RAM, you can do it by emptying > > your signal-rate counter into a message-rate counter that takes care of > > the big digits while the signal-rate counter keeps on taking care of the > > small digits and fractions. (do you want an example ?) > > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > > | Mathieu Bouchard ------------------------------------- Aix-en-Provence > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pd-list@iem.at mailing list > > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> > > http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list > > _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list