p.j.e.batchelor@gmail.com

In the continued absence of >4ch [buffer~]s (with 5.1, 7.1 etc I 

remain surprised and a bit frustrated at this), I'm trying to find a 

means of sample-accurately synching the transfer of an 8ch file to two 

4ch [buffer~]s. I've tried the following which isn't successful.

I'm assuming that two simultaneously-triggered (control domain) 

[record~] objects wouldn't be reliably synchronous?

There's probably an easy solution for this, but I'm a bit stumped.

In the continued absence of >4ch [buffer~]s (with 5.1, 7.1 etc I  
remain surprised and a bit frustrated at this), I'm trying to find a  
means of sample-accurately synching the transfer of an 8ch file to two  
4ch [buffer~]s. I've tried the following which isn't successful.

I'm assuming that two simultaneously-triggered (control domain)  
[record~] objects wouldn't be reliably synchronous?

synched-buffer-recording

Sorry to answer with another question, but i wonder if a solution like send your signals in 8 record~ objects, and starting the recording with sending a 1 simultaneously to all of them would make them start the recording at exactly the same time (sample-accurately)???

Thanks for your response, Zoe. I'd thought about using [record~] in 

that way but am not confident that a 1 sent to both in the control 

domain would trigger them sample accurately and in sync. It certainly 

doesn't when simultaneously triggering two [groove~] objects.

I'm getting round the problem of syncing playback from my two 4ch 

[buffer~]s via a cludge: controlling two 4ch [play~] objects with the 

sync output from [groove~]. Complicated and inefficient cpu-wise but 

it seems the only way to have more control over pitch shift over time 

([line~] and [curve~] don't offer enough control).

If anyone has a better idea re this latter aspect too I'd appreciate 

On 19 Feb 2009, at 11:19, zoe de lukaas wrote:

> Sorry to answer with another question, but i wonder if a solution 

> like send your signals in 8 record~ objects, and starting the 

> recording with sending a 1 simultaneously to all of them would make 

> them start the recording at exactly the same time (sample- 

Thanks for your response, Zoe. I'd thought about using [record~] in  
that way but am not confident that a 1 sent to both in the control  
domain would trigger them sample accurately and in sync. It certainly  
doesn't when simultaneously triggering two [groove~] objects.

I'm getting round the problem of syncing playback from my two 4ch  
[buffer~]s via a cludge: controlling two 4ch [play~] objects with the  
sync output from [groove~]. Complicated and inefficient cpu-wise but  
it seems the only way to have more control over pitch shift over time  
([line~] and [curve~] don't offer enough control).

If anyone has a better idea re this latter aspect too I'd appreciate  
any thoughts...

>
> Sorry to answer with another question, but i wonder if a solution  
> like send your signals in 8 record~ objects, and starting the  
> recording with sending a 1 simultaneously to all of them would make  
> them start the recording at exactly the same time (sample- 
> accurately)???


Did you try with the "scheduler in audio interrupt" option on?

>It certainly 
doesn't when simultaneously triggering two [groove~] objects.

Try index~ with count~. You are certain of the sync that way.

I have to say that scheduler in audio interrupt works fine for me.

Try index~ with count~.  You are certain of the sync that way.

synched buffer recording