Philipp von Neumann

I patched an subpatcher that allows automatic naming for Wave Files created by sfrecord~ .The problem is, the files i create with this automatic naming system don't work.

Maybe there is something wrong with the syntax in the filename? I double checked it with an normal sfrecord~ patch and putting an open message with the exact same name into it, as it would be created with my naming system and these new files work well.

Here are the testing patch and the two subpatches needed for this. Maybe someone can help me?

Please_debug_me.maxpat

name_date.maxpat

rec2.maxpat

I patched an subpatcher that allows automatic naming for Wave Files created by sfrecord~ .The problem is, the files i create with this automatic naming system don't work. 

Hi Everybody!
I patched an subpatcher that allows automatic naming for Wave Files created by sfrecord~ .The problem is, the files i create w

wave-files-created-from-sfrecord~-don't-work

if path is not a problem, then maybe del 50 ?

you should actually precise what means "don't work"

files not getting created or created but not recorded ?

for such automated stuff I use this rather than delayed start.

image.png

where should that files get stored ?
No absolute path ?

if path is not a problem, then maybe del 50 ?
you should actually precise what means "don't work"
files not getting created or created but not recorded ?

Sorry, if there were to less informations!

The files gets stored in the directory of the patch. (BTW: how can i set the path?)

The File gets created, thats not the problem. But it's a Wave File, that no software can play. It's like a corrupted file.

I checked it with the same message, only 'handwritten' with an standard sfrecord~ and this works. 

Maybe the sprintf object is something doing with the syntax you can't see?

I checked it with the same message, only 'handwritten' with an standard sfrecord~ and this works. 
Maybe the sprintf object is something doing with the syntax you can't see?

Is it really necessary to use abstractions for this so simple patch ?

sure you would have detected your mistake much easier.

On rec 1 you start recording after 50 ms,

but sprintf is set to output the path after 60 ms ...

I would still try to use absolute path, for more flexibility,

like recording into differeent HD or Partition.

I had a look at the patches...
Is it really necessary to use abstractions for this so simple patch ?
If it were flat patch to look at, I am
sure you would have  detected your mistake much easier.
On rec 1 you start recording after 50 ms,
but sprintf is set to output the path after 60 ms ...




-----------
I would still try to use absolute path, for more flexibility,
like recording into differeent HD or Partition.


sorry, did not see your question about setting path.

You could use savedialog folder to select folder to record into,

It is allways better to check the output using print

sorry, did not see your question about setting path.
You could use savedialog folder to select folder to record into,
then combine that with file name.
It is allways better to check the output using print
or message before sending it to sfrecord

Wave Files created from sfrecord~ don't work