<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0"
		xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
		xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
		xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
		xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"

			>

	<channel>
		<title>Cycling 74  &#187;  Topic: send &amp; receive vs. patch cords</title>
		<atom:link href="http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<link>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/feed</link>
		<description></description>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:26:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<generator>http://bbpress.org/?v=2.2.4</generator>
		<language></language>

		
														
					
				<item>
					<guid>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-47987</guid>
					<title><![CDATA[send &amp; receive vs. patch cords]]></title>
					<link>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-47987</link>
					<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 08:46:44 +0000</pubDate>
					<dc:creator>nycpntr@yahoo.com</dc:creator>

					<description>
						<![CDATA[
						<p>is there any latency when using send and receive vs. &#8220;standard&#8221; patch cords?<br />
This question has been bugging me for a few weeks now. should have posted earlier, would not be up at 3:41 lol </p>
<p>SPAM: <a href="http://maxabeles.com/sounds/Mantanae.mp3" rel="nofollow">http://maxabeles.com/sounds/Mantanae.mp3</a> </p>
<p>all max/msp synthesis and sequencing</p>
						]]>
					</description>

					
					
				</item>

			
				<item>
					<guid>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172536</guid>
					<title><![CDATA[Re: send &#038; receive vs. patch cords]]></title>
					<link>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172536</link>
					<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:06:03 +0000</pubDate>
					<dc:creator>Julien Bayle</dc:creator>

					<description>
						<![CDATA[
						<p>send/receive are more CPU consuming than a &#8220;standard&#8221; patch cord.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m trying to find some &#8220;rules&#8221; for my own use here:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.julienbayle.net/software/maxmspjitter/" rel="nofollow">http://www.julienbayle.net/software/maxmspjitter/</a></p>
<p>if you&#8217;re interested.</p>
						]]>
					</description>

					
					
				</item>

			
				<item>
					<guid>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172537</guid>
					<title><![CDATA[Re: send &#038; receive vs. patch cords]]></title>
					<link>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172537</link>
					<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
					<dc:creator>broc</dc:creator>

					<description>
						<![CDATA[
						<p>Note that MaxMSP alone and M4L behave differently in this regard.</p>
<p>In my experience, with MaxMSP alone there is no latency at all.<br />
You can verify this with the [timer] object.</p>
						]]>
					</description>

					
					
				</item>

			
				<item>
					<guid>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172538</guid>
					<title><![CDATA[Re: send &#038; receive vs. patch cords]]></title>
					<link>http://cycling74.com/forums/topic/send-receive-vs-patch-cords/#post-172538</link>
					<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:53:57 +0000</pubDate>
					<dc:creator>Julien Bayle</dc:creator>

					<description>
						<![CDATA[
						<p>I had to precise something:<br />
- send/receive in the same patch in M4L seems to be ok<br />
- send/receive from a M4L patch to another one consumes CPU (we found that with Ralf Suckow by making this workaround to use 16 midi channels in &#038; out instead of the channel1 limitation : <a href="http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=35&#038;t=128795" rel="nofollow">http://forum.ableton.com/viewtopic.php?f=35&#038;t=128795</a> </p>
<p>by the way, in the last case, there is no other way to do that&#8230; so</p>
						]]>
					</description>

					
					
				</item>

					
		
	</channel>
	</rss>

