Re: [sc-users] Sample synchronous bundle/beats?

[Daniel Mayer <daniel-mayer@xxxxxxxx>]

Am 12.12.2014 um 19:27 schrieb Stephan Wittwer <stephan.wittwer@xxxxxxxxx>:

> Maybe I don't understand the problem or the formulation ("separately at any time") ? 

Because ideally, at every full second we have a multiple of the period length,
so a separate entry with opposite phase would, again ideally, annul the first signal.
This doesn't work here either, not even nearby.

As James pointed out, /d_recv is asynchronous, then there's effective sample rate jittering also.
Signals are completely annulating though if the two lines are evaluated at once. 
This not only gives audibly silence, it's perfectly 0 - I checked with analysis tool from here:

http://new-supercollider-mailing-lists-forums-use-these.2681727.n2.nabble.com/sample-accuracy-with-lang-timing-was-Various-timing-issues-td7615278.html

So it seems in this case synths are started together, although late, in sync with sample-accuracy.
That they are late can be checked with this comparison:

SynthDef(\test, { |freq = 440, iph = 1| Out.ar(1, SinOsc.ar(freq, mul: iph)) } ).add;

t.schedAbs(t.elapsedBeats.roundUp(1), { s.makeBundle(1, { x = f.play(args: [freq: 400, fadeTime: 0]) }) });
t.schedAbs(t.elapsedBeats.roundUp(1), { s.makeBundle(1, { Synth(\test, [freq: 500]) }) });

Right channel is earlier and on time (scheduled synth start of known synthdef with timestamp).

Greetings

Daniel

-----------------------------
www.daniel-mayer.at
-----------------------------






_______________________________________________
sc-users mailing list

info (subscription, etc.): http://www.beast.bham.ac.uk/research/sc_mailing_lists.shtml
archive: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/marchives/sc-users/
search: https://listarc.bham.ac.uk/lists/sc-users/search/