I've added this along with his friend isBypassed()...

@jadg
If you wan´t to know how "Expressive Clarinet" sounds like:

Expressive Clarinet

@christoph-hart Just the MIDI ones. I forgot about those console commands though, they are pretty useful!

@christoph-hart Well as it turns out I don't think in my particular use case I'm going be able to use this anyway (I've been experimenting with a slider pack) but I shall explain it anyway.

In my main GUI script I have a CC remapper, so the user can send CC1 to CC11 for example, and I use a table to allow them to adjust the curve/skew of the CC values. One table per CC (the instrument only uses about 5 CCs).

What I want to do though is defer the MIDI callbacks in my GUI script and decouple the MIDI parts, such as this CC remapper into a separate non-deferred script. I'd then use the GUI script to set the CC mapping up in this other script which will actually handle the redirection of the CC data but I'd need to be able to pass the table values across as well.

Will deferring this CC mapping stuff actually make a big efficiency difference?

Fixed now. There's no fallback yet (just deactivates the FFT Analyser), but at least it compiles.

I've added a method Engine.isControllerUsedByAutomation() which might come in handy for some other things too.

No, only when enabled is false

I don't think it's viable to add this to the streaming engine, since it's a very limited use case.

If you use a sample start mod value that is not too high, you might still get the RR effect you need without wasting too much memory.

For example, if you set the SampleStartMod value to 16384, you have almost half a second of different material, which might be enough to kill the machine gun effect.

Also, if you use HLAC, memory consumption will drop by 50% (because it uses 16bit for the preload buffers).

Yes that looks like what I'm after. Thank you!

Good idea!

I'll just shift it a few pixels manually then until my eyes are happy :)

Well as soon as the GroupFX is enabled, all groups are supposed to play simultaneously so this method looses its purposes, so yes that would be the case.

Aah, now I understand. Yeah, and it gets even better with the new system :)

You mean like this buddy here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8ePgySe3Wk

Yeah, that idea is floating around for quite some time, and I do have plans to implement this somewhere in the future, however I am currently focussing on the VST export thing.

Yeah I was only thinking in standalone, that's were I am 99% of the time.

Aha, that's a good idea!

Well this, technically, is the standard way to do wavetables. It is the way Seruam and all of the others do it: http://www.earlevel.com/main/category/digital-audio/oscillators/wavetable-oscillators/

I see you've been busy with commits today :) thanks

Good question...