i thought i remembered how to do that, but it looks like I don't. i just want to be able to have multiple instances of my patches that all have sends and recieves in them without the instances talking to each other.
You're quite right about this; despite having several years experience with MaxMSP, both practical and theoretical, and having gone through the documentation in detail, this is one aspect that seems to elude me. I often encounter patches built by others using 0#_whatever, in subpatches and abstractions where [poly~] is used. I try to copy the approach and it 'doesn't work'...
right on, thanks. how do I name a buffer in a way that will work similarly? I mean I'm not trying to build anything polyphonic necessarily, but i have a patch that records audio into a buffer and reads it back with numbers being sent all over, and i want it to be all contained so that if i open the same patcher again, just another window, they wont be talking to each other at all and will be reading only from their own buffer. how do i does it?!
and then conect this to both, BOTH, your buffer and your play object.
to make 100% sure that the audio objects do not come across (which could
happen if audio is running already when you load another instance of the
patcher with the buffer) you could give the buffer a #0_blubblub name in addition.
i dont do this, it is a bit confusing because now the buffer shows a name which
does not match its actual status. i use [buffer~ noname] or something like that to
visualize that its name is set from outside or by a loadbang.
if you use an abstraction you might encounter situations where right to left order
suddenly makes a difference; i would not like to initialise objects like waveform~
or buffer~ from a subpatch, it is safer to have the loadbang on the same level or
attached a simple example for the creation of unique names a la "1688drumsampler"
where there is no loadbang in the abstraction for that reason.
you use it like this:
[buffer~ setme] and [play~ setme]