Brik

I have tried to use matrix~ for an fx routing system but I can't put up with the required signal vector delay. Is there an alternative method? Matrix~ was ideal because twelve different fx modules need to be routed (in any order). Maybe theres an object similar to matrix~ but won't allow an output going to the same input, so the delay is not necessary.

substitute-for-matrix-which-doesnt-allow-feedback

One other option is to have different modules saved as abstractions, and

instantiate a network including audio connections through scripting. Not a

practical solution, since the rebuilding of the audio network will introduce

Another option is to have a succession of 12 poly~, and to load the desired

Jan 28th update: Audio Freeze - From Melody to Harmony

> I have tried to use matrix~ for an fx routing system but I can't put up with

> the required signal vector delay. Is there an alternative method? Matrix~ was

> ideal because twelve different fx modules need to be routed (in any order).

> Maybe theres an object similar to matrix~ but won't allow an output going to

> the same input, so the delay is not necessary.

One other option is to have different modules saved as abstractions, and
instantiate a network including audio connections through scripting. Not a
practical solution, since the rebuilding of the audio network will introduce
clicks.
Another option is to have a succession of 12 poly~, and to load the desired
effect inside each of them.
J-F.
-- 
Jan 28th update: Audio Freeze - From Melody to Harmony
http://www.jeanfrancoischarles.com

> I have tried to use matrix~ for an fx routing system but I can't put up with
> the required signal vector delay. Is there an alternative method? Matrix~ was
> ideal because twelve different fx modules need to be routed (in any order).
> Maybe theres an object similar to matrix~ but won't allow an output going to
> the same input, so the delay is not necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> Rob

Thanks for the reply. I've looked into dynamic loading with poly~, but since some of the effects require continuous audio, that isn't really an option.

Hi Stefan and thanks for the reply. I knew the matrix~ wasn't responsible for the delay, but in my use of the matrix~ object I never had an output (e.g. output 1) going to the same input, so there would have been no feedback. But because with matrix~ there is the potential for feedback (e.g. it is possible to have a routing loop) the delay is necessary (maybe because the routes which are inactive still send a zero signal?). What I meant is whether a matrix-like object exists which forbids entirely these self-referential loops and so a delay via tapin/out is unnecessary. 

Anyway that is not important now because that example you posted solved it! I'd never have thought of that and it's so simple...most of my time learning maxmsp is spent learning how to do the same stuff in half the number of objects...

Hi Stefan and thanks for the reply. I knew the matrix~ wasn't responsible for the delay, but in my use of the matrix~ object I never had an output (e.g. output 1) going to the same input, so there would have been no feedback. But because with matrix~ there is the potential for feedback (e.g. it is possible to have a routing loop) the delay is necessary (maybe because the routes which are inactive still send a zero signal?). What I meant is whether a matrix-like object exists which forbids entirely these self-referential loops and so a delay via tapin/out is unnecessary. 
Anyway that is not important now because that example you posted solved it! I'd never have thought of that and it's so simple...most of my time learning maxmsp is spent learning how to do the same stuff in half the number of objects...
Cheers!


Substitute for matrix~ which doesn't allow feedback