2016-06-15 5:09 GMT-03:00 Peter P. <peterpar...@fastmail.com>: > Orm's implementation of the random phase might also be cheaper than > your two fexpr~ for that part.
it's just "expr~" not "fexpr~" ;) > You might not have to be conservative with CPU > usage in your case at all however. > nope, and I need to be more intuitive (as this is a didactic material) and I consider this to be "simpler" - subjective > It does work and might save cpu compared to fexpr~. > biquad~ is surely cheaper than fexpr~ !!! > In my case I am trying a textbook implementation for now. > yep, that's what I was going for in that example, what you think? If you have more remarks other than efficiency, I'd like to know. cheers
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
