Does poly~ have voice steal
Hi all
I'm learning poly~ (which is a fantastic object btw) and wanted to know if [poly~] had voice steal like it,s brother [poly] 2nd argument (1)?
I know that [mute 1, 0] to [thispoly] == freeing up of processing and the 0 is free voice alert to parent poly.
But say you have only 8 voices being triggered very fast and the last voices trigger has not received the 0. sig~ or mess. indicating say the end of the amp, is the next bang ignored ??
Logically yes, but I think not ?
Thanks a lot to all for shedding a little light.
phil
I just did a little test having a AMP Release of 2000ms and trigger the source around 100ms. And the answer is : No poly~ does not have voice steal. it's wait till a voice is freed up.
thanks anyways.
ps. I would like to know if I am confusing things up here.
phil
This is a good moment to open either the help or reference for poly~ and search for the word 'steal'.
_
johan
DOH!!
I just realized that it that this problem is super easy to overcome. JUST ADD MORE VOICES.
How silly of me. The more I have , the more will get freed up before the last one is gets available again.
Is there a logical ratio to follow here ??
thanks
phil
>>This is a good moment to open either the help or reference for poly~ and search for the word 'steal'.
I had. that's why I posted , I couldn,t anything on it anywhere.
I was following the tutorial and I did not see it anywhere.
thanks tho
phil
Stealing will work only when using the built in voice allocation stuff, using the note and midinote messages. And then it works properly.
_
johan
thanks johan
It was nearly 4 am. I just saw now in the reference manual. But as they mention, undesired clicks may occur if steal in on.
So could we say as a rule of thumb that it,s better to keep it off?
Is there a work around?
thanks
phil
phil hughes wrote on Mon, 21 September 2009 08:32And the answer is : No poly~ does not have voice steal. it's wait till a voice is freed up.
phil
that always depends on how you use poly~.
it is not very clear to see, but there are two completely
different methods of voicing right in the helpfile already.
when you use "target"ing, a running poly voice would simply
be sstolen by sending (for example) a new frequency value
and restarting its envelopes and lfos to the same instance.
-110
your right.
But again, my main interest in poly~ is to use it for granular type stuff @ speeds like 20 ms. using a 4 point amp env.
Simply because I find that @ high speed triggering of a sound it is many more time smoother then not having poly~.
But i was wondering If I would need less voices if voice stealing was involved?
voilà
phil
one way could be to calculate outside how many voices are needed. like .. 8 voices when 4 grainstreams are active or
however you patch works.
then you could just set the number of voices to poly.
but i must say, at least back on max 4, i have very bad
expierience about changing number of voices, it often does
not free up CPU when you kill voices while they are still
running and it tends to crash a lot.
something automatic which the poly patcher does on its own
seems more safe.
thanks for all the hints roman.
Right i think the best way is to no worry about it and have a[in 2] to to control a ratio that makes the amp of each voice's overall lenght rise as you trigger a grain faster. In other words the faster the triggering, the longer the amp lenght.
Although I do have Max 5 ,I am still on 4.6 as it works 20 times better w. my old powerbook g4. Max 5 is way , way to slow and + it crashes way to often.
I'll wait till i get a newer computer.
>>but i must say, at least back on max 4, i have very bad
expierience about changing number of voices, it often does
not free up CPU when you kill voices while they are still
running and it tends to crash a lot.
Yes I notice that right away while doing the turorial yesterday, that in order to free up the CPU when decreasing voices, you have to turn the sig~ off and back on again!!
thanks a lot.
phil
@steal 1 (please provide at least 10 characters)