millenliam

So I'm currently building a big patch that allows a user to affect up to 10 samples simultaneously with individual FX such as distortion, delay, reverb, etc... which I've built as their own patchers. There are 10 of the FX sub-patchers linked to each of the 10 [groove~] objects, meaning that in all there are 100 sub-patchers, and this has pushed the DSP CPU level over 100%, meaning my mac just can't handle it.

While experimenting with trying to get the CPU level down, I've noticed that if I remove all the instances of just one of the FX the level drops dramatically. So I was thinking of redesigning the patch so that the user could just drag and drop a .maxpat file (one of the FX patchers) into the main patch when they want to apply that FX to a sample, instead of all the FX patchers being loaded when the parent patch is opened.

Is something like this possible in Max? I've used the [dropfile] object before to load audio files into buffers but is it possible to load a file/sub-patcher into, say, an empty patcher object, or something to that effect?

Hey
So I'm currently building a big patch that allows a user to affect up to 10 samples simultaneously with individual FX such as distortion, delay, reverb, etc... which I've built as their own patchers. There are 10 of the FX sub-patchers linked to each of the 10 [groove~] objects, meaning that in all  there are 100 sub-patchers, and this has pushed the DSP CPU level over 100%, meaning my mac just can't handle it.

Is something like this possible in Max? I've used the [dropfile] object before to load audio files into buffers but is it possible to load a file/sub-patcher into, say, an empty patcher object, or something to that effect? 

loading-and-removing-sub-patchers-dynamically

you can use dropfile just fine to get the nam of the object so that you

you can use dropfile just fine to get the nam of the object so that you
can trigger a script to create it.


some FX are a lot more CPU-heavy than others, would be interesting to experiment with that and see... that's a lotta patchers you got there!

[poly~] might also help in this regard, not sure. you can also use [mute~] to stop processing in various subpatches, but also am not sure this would affect the level very much.

If I were you I'd look into [poly~] using the "patchername" message, there's an example in the help file called DynamicPoly. You could hook this up with a [dropfile] to make sure you only have the instances you need loaded in to the patch, this also doesn't break the DSP chain so it works smoothly without any need for ducking.

Loading and removing sub-patchers dynamically