Yeah, sending FUDI would be good. Or OSC. In case of synthesis, better send controller data instead of audio.
In my case (sending processed acoustic audio input) that wouldn't work, but never mind. Katja On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Phil Stone <pkst...@ucdavis.edu> wrote: > That's a fairly brilliant idea. No need for fancy audio-quality wireless > units, either. > > > Phil > > > On 4/26/13 1:19 PM, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: > >> ______________________________**__ >>> From: katja <katjavet...@gmail.com> >>> To: "o...@onyx-ashanti.com" <onyxasha...@gmail.com> >>> Cc: pd-list <Pd-list@iem.at>; Martin Peach <martin.pe...@sympatico.ca> >>> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 4:08 PM >>> Subject: Re: [PD] direct connection from pd to webrowser, low latency >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi Onyx, >>> >>> What is your aim, do you want to entertain your (physically present) >>> audience via smart phones instead of PA system? >>> >>> I have a similar quest pending: to send Pd audio from a wearable >>> computer over wireless to PA system. >>> >> Why not send FUDI to a box connected directly to the PA system? >> >> -Jonathan >> >> >> ______________________________**_________________ >> Pd-list@iem.at mailing list >> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/** >> listinfo/pd-list <http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >> >> > > ______________________________**_________________ > Pd-list@iem.at mailing list > UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/** > listinfo/pd-list <http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list> >
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
