metro vs. phasor~ for timing

    Jan 08 2010 | 8:14 pm
    I'm fairly new to the Max world, and am currently developing strictly in Max for Live.
    In my explorations of others' work, I've noticed that a lot of people seem to use a quantized phasor~ coupled with an edge detector to generate timed bangs instead of using a metro object. Is there some advantage to this? In theory I suppose an audio-rate edge detector could be 44 times more accurate at 44.1KHz than a metro refreshing every 1ms, but being off by at most 1 ms doesn't seem all that bad to me, so I feel like I might be missing something.
    Can anyone offer any insight into best practices for generating a solid timing signal? Thanks!

    • Jan 09 2010 | 12:55 am
      The refresh rate of objects like [metro] (scheduler-based objects) allow for slop in order to keep other things (like GUI refresh) working nicely. If you use phasor~ and have Overdrive on, the timing should be rock-solid, at the occasional expense of drawing etc. So it's not just 44 times as accurate, it also doesn't drift... you can at first be off by 1 msec, but eventually you could be off by a lot more, by design.
      Definitely use the audio objects for timing if your needs are precise.
    • Jan 09 2010 | 2:27 am
      Thanks for the reply, that makes a lot of sense. phasor~ it is, then!
    • Jan 09 2010 | 9:16 am
      remember that in m4l 'overdrive' is effectively always on, as is AII, as is audio, so in that respect very different to max, so it is a no brainer to use the phasor~. but of course transport locks to live transport rock solid if that is what you need too.