* IOhannes m zmoelnig via Pd-list <[email protected]> [2025-10-16 10:06]: [...] > if you want to have sample-accurate resolution, this is a non-trivial task. > > zexy's [time] will give you the current system time, but Pd uses an audio > buffer, so the actual system time might will typically not correspond (nor > have a constant offset) to an imaginary timestamp attached to a "sample" as > it leaves your soundcard. Do I understand correctly that one sample from my ADCs will arrive at a random moment within the lengh of one buffer in Pd?
> we did something like synchronous recording on multiple devices in the wilma > project a couple of years ago (<https://wilma.kug.ac.at>). > > iirc, it involved special hardware that was synched via radio (not NTP over > WiFi) and encoded the wall clock timestamps within a dedicated audio > channel. Ah yes, WILMA! In my case I want to go for the best possible resolution without a dedicated radio clock and with standard laptop hardware. Is banging [time] at every microsecond still the best way maxing my cpu? Thanks a lot! Peter --- [email protected] - the Pure Data mailinglist https://lists.iem.at/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/WREU7AZ5EB3EJHKXFNCRU2U7ITOH5OEJ/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.iem.at/
