Closed for Company Meetings: Between September 18 (5pm PDT) and September 22 (12pm PDT), Support and Sales requests will be delayed. Only time-sensitive issues will be addressed during that time. Thanks for your patience.
Thispatcher performance speed versus normal connections?
Jul 22 2010 | 6:49 pm
I am contemplating switching to thispatcher for my effects bank switching. My switcher patch now has over 40 exits coming out of it and it's getting a little hard to handle. I turn effects on and off very quickly so I'm just wondering if there's any kind of slight performance difference between using thispatcher to script changes versus just connecting things directly. I'm probably being silly, but wanted to check before spending too much time.
Also..any tips for keeping 40 different video effects nice and tidy would be appreciated. Right now I'm using umenu's for readability and gates to turn things on and off.
- Jul 23 2010 | 4:27 pmDo you have an example patch to know what you are talking about? It sounds also like using forward/receive with changing destinations could be an option...I use scripting a lot, but only while initializing/loading patches...Stefan
- Jul 23 2010 | 6:18 pmI ended up going ahead and doing the scripting thing to get rid of a bunch of patch cords on my main patch . I don't notice any kind of significant change which is good..all it does is make some of my subpatchers a little more busy, but not too bad. it also allows me to re-order my effects bank a little better which is helpful.I'd post my patch but it has a lot of custom elements and shaders and everything is midi controller to my specific devices so i don't think anyone would have time to click around and decode what's going on
