Global Send receive nodes....

[Christoph Hart]

@Lindon yes. It might be possible to use two different targets so that

GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet
GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet2

will work, but the receiving end needs a unique connection (that's the same principal as with the local routing.send and routing.receive nodes).

[Lindon]

@Christoph-Hart said in Global Send receive nodes....:

GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet
GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet2

yeah this works:

GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet
GlobalsendWet2 -> GlobalReceiveWet2

but this doesnt:

GlobalsendWet -> GlobalReceiveWet
GlobalsendWet2-> GlobalReceiveWet

..as to your version: not tried it...might if I get some time...actually not sure how I would even set that up the Global.send appears to have only one target that can be specified:

[Christoph Hart]

HiseSnippet 1156.3oc6XEsaaaCEkxIzowqcqAXCXO5GSGBBrRZRbwdnMwIt0XKIFUYA8s.ZJpXBSQJPQkDug8xdZeO8KXeR8OniTTNVxxIoQncK.a1.F5x68Rdz4dtjRtuTfIwwBIvowIiiH.mGC8FyUC6LDQ4fd6Cb9F3tIJw4DNQhTDevdiiPww5KbbV30lfbVdQP5mO7x8PLDGSlND.bpfhI+LMjplNZ+W8STFqKxmbBMLWzO+U8vBdGASjnAzBvVfHDdD5bxQHSX0ff2fhGBb9A3NtnfVt67h1a5uU6MbG36GrY6WzFi2dC2svjs1Bga21mrIvo9A9TkP5ozfOVOo6I7G6MTbI2t.mRioCXDigKvSux1gAcFRY98mvNw.fyh8mxUKX4puEdH0md83S4rml5n4zLxSZN0tMH4dOfjSNHsnERq.8vRZjZpGCd9JXOthHCP5ZSdnXiE37WvNBc.b05gnQjtRsw0Ir51sZsVS8OO6GCR3XEUvaJ3GITji4q9rF+Vika76MZNqqff45yrLRAiQjy0sQNHusDWkmDNfHWq4EHVB45.029E4z5eZbJ1dWmKPAuGmpNNhjY2Uv7Mbk45xU.PFsou5W5sORgLEkrwzwEQjJpANN6StP2FXKQKC2mDORIhzMBkpeZkivOggTEkSlFsLGZ9nPMzTn3wT037Mh2CMVqaUi8oBwUf8oJ7v4iwZyAiZl5KAFy5LeB7ff.BVMEfKB69tp1F15d2F1HqMTullE+wYlM69N241.9mvoh8HIIBIImH5yPiWMFEFwHuUiw0ZNfIvi7n+JobGRjEB6YhXU7PDmSXwUoQp9moMm.uUjnn7yODojzq.NviRB8z6qiIcxPmdLmZldHqcKisQW3Q39oFeT+Iyoqw1Iyo6Dm4Z+NhntTHGkVNxtF3rjk6iSI4yBtxErKiItriHLhloR00fzw5KXiiFJ3TrYHaDSP5tghD8hjAW8QPmfnLir1KIVuQg+wbOcvom64rvoDYb5DuDr055uZY9QBesq5cQXMwNtORMzzuX16QKNIx0wWKRKf075D6AfEbal0IGUZINMpCMrg4fRmExs+iUhZrzMf0rKTu3SMdwHF3TiDvb+jNmlvm.YSnKACSXJJ3Fgu0cYzNIw6CPuADXYn6f.mGBrd9RRUN4.5SfmyDCPryh0phhv86fRa+v54CoLjKNE4A9x0e86C9XIvW6N.utEgSRa9m.95PFIP2yzGI0Ko9TdahSrzAbHkmE6zcqODc0Li8gW5oHQlsixGm2Hxk1677QZKi1InzzT.Ifb74ir0O2G9U9uNeYysZk9Ylih09279+3yQseInjd9vGtE+aVIjtWh6+h6BkIF23guX7oSDRRBlPufTDwe+rxwIQUF3kln+e+HSgbyG9RfUlox4VYMP4Y5+hhfa1XOgXTHJ8IOq16.9OwyIGhvRwYX6i9aX1GkNhVvwSKxKCOzX2zEbwrTbH0mdFFWbpJk3FUMwMqZhOupItUUSb6pl3NUMw12chl+mIy+OWn80YzsD8OHUD53b.GoeSszVYveC+L3ZtB

[Lindon]

@Christoph-Hart oh yes of course, silly me.

[Lindon]

@Lindon so in the end the rule is:

You can split a send to several destinations, but you cant merge several sends into a single destination...

[aaronventure]

@Lindon can you merge data into the send node using xfader or logic op?

[Lindon]

@aaronventure yes of course, but of course this means you will need to put all your processing in a single scriptnode network... AND... networks with Global send and receives cant be compiled...

[aaronventure]

@Lindon isn't the compilation step just for reducing overhead while working in HISE?

But yeah, snex and faust need to compiled first before export, so I see how this can cause friction between workflows.

[Lindon]

@aaronventure said in Global Send receive nodes....:

@Lindon isn't the compilation step just for reducing overhead while working in HISE?

But yeah, snex and faust need to compiled first before export, so I see how this can cause friction between workflows.

I was under the impression - and I'll admit this was a fair time ago when Christoph first introduced script Node compilation - that it reduced CPU usage to use a compiled network vs leaving it "native"

In my current case there are a bunch of faust filter nodes in my process, so they need compiling so I'm separating out the "processing" and leaving the Global send/receives in "native" mode. So yes this is a bit frustrating from a workflow (and testing) point of view...

[aaronventure]

@Lindon one day Chris will find himself on the annoying end of that workflow and we'll get the automated compilation step for faust and snex

[Lindon]

@aaronventure said in Global Send receive nodes....:

@Lindon one day Chris will find himself on the annoying end of that workflow and we'll get the automated compilation step for faust and snex

LOL - yeah maybe, ..but I dont mind it so much - what would have been nice was to be able to compile Global send/Receives into dlls - but I can see why thats a non-starter...

[Christoph Hart]

@aaronventure said in Global Send receive nodes....:

one day Chris will find himself on the annoying end of that workflow

Actually I'm using and enjoying this workflow on a daily basis - being able to compile parts of a more complex system and then treat them as black-box items that just do whatever they should is satisfying as f***.

but you cant merge several sends into a single destination...

Just use a split node, put multiple receive nodes in there, BAM, multiple sources at the same target.

[Lindon]

@Christoph-Hart said in Global Send receive nodes....:

Just use a split node, put multiple receive nodes in there, BAM, multiple sources at the same target.

exactly what I'm doing....