MSP vs Max control values
Oct 30 2015 | 7:58 pm
Have seen some patches that are using a [sig~] object to convert values from Max data and route them into some MSP object. (For example arguments for [adsr~])
Is it useful? People who used that, told me that routing like that is click less, but as I understand it is much more cpu hungry to convert every value from your dials. Also I haven't heard any clicks without [sig~] convertion.
So is there any real cons and odds of using a [sig~], as an argument value converter, or it is just a big fake?
- Oct 30 2015 | 11:02 pm
- Oct 31 2015 | 9:28 amHi IVNOS, Using audio (MSP) signals for control, instead of control (Max) message, is much more accurate (meaning in time accuracy). An audio sample, cannot be late!, but a Max message can!Depending on what your goal is, there is a better suiting approach weighting accuracy and CPU consumption. For the example of [adsr~] If you set the arguments by hand, there is no need to turn them to signals.Generally, if you want something to be as much accurate as possible (time-wise) , do it in the MSP domain, if not, Max messages are OK (usually).As for the CPU load, with the CPU power nowadays, I wouldn't bother thinking of that. Just to be cleat, I wouldn't convert all my dials to audio, but where I *need* sample accurate calculation, I use audio signals.Hope this helps, but I might have confused you more... so, yeap! Nik
- Oct 31 2015 | 8:16 pmNIKOLAS K, no you are not confused me more. You just confirmed my thoughts. I just thought if i will use [sig~] conversion, it will give me some magical profit when i'm manualy entering values. You just teared away this stupid thoughts out of me.
- Nov 01 2015 | 7:44 pmit is "clickless" when you use line msp, sig msp does not do more than feeding a number into the other msp object.and in both cases the message will affect the signal value only with the beginning of the next vector.
