changeable route argument


    Nov 17 2007 | 3:52 pm
    Does anyone know if it is possible to change the arguments for route without going into edit mode? I know it can be done with scripting, but I'm looking for another way. I'm using route inside a poly~ and I want to update the argument with the instance number of the thispoly~ object - something like that. Here are two ways to get around the problem, but they each require several objects - which will probably take a toll when using 100 instances inside poly~. So a simple solution using route would be ideal. Any ideas?
    Zachary

    • Nov 17 2007 | 4:16 pm
      try xroute or Tim Place's tap.route. Check maxobjects.com for the download links.
      David
      On Nov 17, 2007, at 7:52 AM, Zachary Seldess wrote:
      > > Does anyone know if it is possible to change the arguments for > route without going into edit mode? I know it can be done with > scripting, but I'm looking for another way. I'm using route inside > a poly~ and I want to update the argument with the instance number > of the thispoly~ object - something like that. Here are two ways to > get around the problem, but they each require several objects - > which will probably take a toll when using 100 instances inside > poly~. So a simple solution using route would be ideal. Any ideas? >
    • Nov 17 2007 | 4:40 pm
      There's also a dynamic route abstraction in v001 (http://001.vade.info).
    • Nov 17 2007 | 7:24 pm
      Thanks for the leads. It ends up not making a significant difference in terms of CPU expense, but at least it simplifies the patching a bit.
      Zachary
    • Nov 19 2007 | 9:26 pm
      Zachary Seldess schrieb: > I'm using route inside a poly~ and I want to update the argument with > the instance number of the thispoly~ object - something like that. > Here are two ways to get around the problem, but they each require > several objects - which will probably take a toll when using 100 > instances inside poly~.
      It won't take a toll if you put this into an abstraction...
      but poly has its own router built in there is actually no need to have the route in the poly abstraction. I'd do it with the target message to poly~ instead...
      Stefan
      -- Stefan Tiedje------------x------- --_____-----------|-------------- --(_|_ ----|-----|-----()------- -- _|_)----|-----()-------------- ----------()--------www.ccmix.com
    • Nov 20 2007 | 2:45 am
      Right, your example is nearly identical to one of mine posted above. I was looking for a single-object solution, as well - provided above. Thanks.
    • Nov 20 2007 | 11:17 am
      Perhaps I have misunderstood your requirements, but could you not use the target message to poly~ ? this would mean having the receive object in the main patch and prepending 'target n' to an inlet of poly~
      On 20/11/2007, Zachary Seldess wrote: > > Right, your example is nearly identical to one of mine posted above. I was looking for a single-object solution, as well - provided above. Thanks. > -- > http://www.zacharyseldess.com > >
    • Nov 20 2007 | 4:22 pm
      Aahh, Samuel and Stefan, your're both right about the target message. Too much coffee not enough sleep - brain......not....... working.
      Thanks.
      Zachary
    • Feb 11 2012 | 6:34 pm
      Hello everybody,
      just found this old topic as I am in this very same situation..
      Tried to prepend 'target n' to what I want to send to the poly~ instance (a list of two numbers in this case), but doesn't really work...? I doublechecked and the instance is not receiving my list..
      Of course if I just send the message 'target n' to the poly~ inlet, then anything being sent through that inlet will go to the specified instance, but I need to assign a different target for each message.. so the prepend would be ideal, but doesn't work :(
      I hope you guys have a solution! Thanks a lot for your help!
      Pedro
    • Feb 11 2012 | 7:45 pm
      You can't just prepend. They would need to be sent as two messages; target first.
      Alternatively you could send with just the instance number prepended, then route internally.
    • Feb 11 2012 | 8:56 pm
      Thanks a lot for the reply Chris
      Yep route internally is what I'm doing now, using xroute tho cause I need it to be dynamic. Works good, but don't like the idea that all the messages are sent to all instances, sounds like a waste of resources to me..
      I have many lists (one for each instance, 60 times per second) being sent in realtime from another app (vvvv) via osc, so it would be a lot of target messages, I don't think it make sense, what do you think? thanks!
    • Feb 12 2012 | 1:13 pm
      if you need to receive target message for every message, you need to send one.
      ther is no way to avoid doing
      [t l b] "my list" [list target 5]
      every time when you want to send a list to a specific voice number - except when it is the same voice than the one before.
      p.s. i agree about the route version not beeing perfect. it is easier and causess less messages when doing the target stuff totally outside.
    • Feb 12 2012 | 1:55 pm
      Thanks a lot Roman
      I will try with the trigger object, I'm just a beginner in max and didn't think about it, shame on me :) But it's probably the best solution indeed Will try and report here, thanks!