>________________________________ > From: katja <[email protected]> >To: Phil Stone <[email protected]> >Cc: Jonathan Wilkes <[email protected]>; pd-list <[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 5:11 PM >Subject: Re: [PD] direct connection from pd to webrowser, low latency > > > >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.
Btw-- are you sending compressed or uncompressed audio? > >Katja > > > > >On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Phil Stone <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>Cc: pd-list <[email protected]>; Martin Peach <[email protected]> >>>>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 >>> >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>[email protected] mailing list >>>UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>>http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >>> >>> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>[email protected] mailing list >>UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> >>http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list >> > > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
