AndreaCarmen

I've been working simultaneously with three patchers for my improvisations.

Each one has its own dac~... I think I read somewhere it's not "advisable" but it works perfectly for me ;-)

Just in one of them I use a controller to do some panning.

Now I want one of the other patchers to have also some sort of panning (I keep using just R&L).

Is it going to continue being still stable?

Hello,
I've been working simultaneously with three patchers for my improvisations.
Each one has its own dac~... I think I read somewhere it's not "advisable" but it works perfectly for me ;-)
Just in one of them I use a controller to do some panning.
Now I want one of the other patchers to have also some sort of panning (I keep using just R&L).
Is it going to continue being still stable?

multiple-dacs

I don't think there's a technical limitation here.

It's bad form from the standpoint of programming style. It might be hard to control clipping; if the sum of your dac~'s is greater than 1. you might not know or be able to easily correct. In similar situations, my sub-patches all have send~'s to some master mixer patch. But if you don't need that kind of control then what you're doing is adequate.

It's bad form from the standpoint of programming style.  It might be hard to control clipping; if the sum of your dac~'s is greater than 1. you might not know or be able to easily correct.  In similar situations, my sub-patches all have send~'s to some master mixer patch.  But if you don't need that kind of control then what you're doing is adequate.


Clipping is actually welcome in this particular case.

I'll try it right away! -- Thx again! -- A.

Thank you for your response.
Clipping is actually welcome in this particular case.
As long as it doesn't crash I'm ok.
I'll try it right away! -- Thx again! -- A.


multiple dacs