instead i would say that it is a good tool if you can formulate the
problem like this: "I have a cool patch X that works great with the
desired latency. I have another cool patch Y that also works nicely. But
if I use them together, things start to fall apart."
then you could run e.g. patch Y in a separate [pd~] instance.
Hi, List !
I stumbled over one question recently, regarding [pd~].
PD (with Audio operations) and PD with video (GEM) are best run in 2
seperate instances of PD, right ? (As video operations can cause audio
dropouts)
So, given these informations about [pd~], running a GEM patch inside an
audio PD patch using [pd~) is not going to be better than having audio
and video in the same patch, right ? (because [pd~] is synchronous to
its parent)
So, for an "asynchronous" situation, i still need to start two seperate
instances of PD to keep audio and video truly seperated ?
Thanks for clarifications !
Best
Oliver
---
[email protected] - the Pure Data mailinglist
https://lists.iem.at/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/EU5IZC5XZPVDNWQWGGWNYUVDGNCYFNSF/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.iem.at/
