Hi,
I am working on an installation that will playback 5 audio files with some granular, volume control and reverb control

each audio should have the same processing. the only difference is that each audio processing will be controlled by a different fsr using arduino.

here is the patch of the first audio file

mypatch.pd

I copy the patch and changed the array name of the files and changed the sending names.
I'm getting this error on the reverb part:

What is the best method to have 5 copies of the same patch but each patch should be load with a different audio file.
Hope I made myself clear
Thanks

Also I was wandering how to deal with the data coming from arduino using the comport.
When I multiple it for both patches it made me lots of bugs. Should I have only one comport in 1 of the 5 patches and then send the data of the sensors from that main patch?

@KMETE said:

What is the best method to have 5 copies of the same patch but each patch should be load with a different audio file.

"Multiply defined" error means, add $0 to object names. (It looks like multiply like a * b, but it's really "multiple-ly defined.")

That is, where you have echo-del1, call it echo-del1-$0.

The $0 gets replaced by a unique number for every load. It's an important technique.

If it's me, I would have only one comport and then route according to incoming data.

hjh

@KMETE You will need to differentiate a whole bunch of objects as when you use a patch more than once at the same time you have in fact what we call an "abstraction".

More here...... https://forum.pdpatchrepo.info/topic/9774/pure-data-noob/4
The text is more understandable than the patch probably.
Use $0 for internal messages and tables/arrays/delwrite~ etc.
For reading different files in an abstraction you should use $1 $2.... etc.
Hope that helps and come back here if you get lost,,,,,,,
David.

@ddw_music
is it similar to --- in MaxMSP ?

and where I have echo-del2 I should call it echo-del2-$0

?

I created this abstraction
audioAbstraction.pd
how can I replaced from outside all the number in green?

So for audioAbstraction 1 all those numbers will be 1.
for audio Abstraction 2 all those numbers will be 2.
etc etc

@KMETE said:

I created this abstraction
audioAbstraction.pd
how can I replaced from outside all the number in green?

So for audioAbstraction 1 all those numbers will be 1.
for audio Abstraction 2 all those numbers will be 2.

You won't have that much control but you can make sure that each patch has the same number within itself, but different from all the other open patches or abstractions.

For object boxes, just write $0 in place of the number: [r reset$0], [tabread4~ array$0L] etc.

For message boxes, it's harder: you have to get the patch id number from an object ([f] or [pack]) and then the message box substitutes from the input data. E.g.

[t b]  // bc you've got a [t b b] in your init stage
|
[f $0]
|
[read -resize 003.wav array$1L(
|
[soundfiler]

Note that the array$1L in the message box will match up to the array$0L in tabread4~ because the $1 receives its value from the [f $0] -- it is unfortunately counterintuitive that it has to be written differently for message boxes, but, that's what we've got.

hjh

Thanks. Is there something simian for the message object (such in maxMSP) for debugging?

@KMETE said:

Thanks. Is there something simian for the message object (such in maxMSP) for debugging?

I have to admit, I don't know quite what you mean. Max has a step debugger but this is for all connections, not only those involving message boxes.

Pd doesn't have a step debugger, but it does, in recent versions, have a [trace] object. See its help patch.

hjh

@KMETE
--- doesnt work in max, it is pluggo/max4live exlcusive.

in max you would use #0

as long as you are typing arguments directly to objects you may even already concatenate it to other symbols: [object #0_argument]

@ddw_music

I have added -$0 for each object that needs (see picture)

the moment I have to reverb patch in a pd patch I'm still getting that multiple define error:

looking at your screenshot you have two identical sub-patches [pd G1002], what is in the sub-patches?

@KMETE said:

the moment I have to reverb patch in a pd patch I'm still getting that multiple define error:

$0 receives a unique integer only for instances of abstractions.

For [pd xxx] boxes, they take the ID of the parent patch (I think). So it isn't unique. You cannot just copy and paste a [pd xxx] object.

You need to save the reverb into a different .pd patch file, alongside the main patch, and use it as if it were an object. Then the $0 will be unique.

hjh

@ddw_music
Thanks. That was working!