@ustk I think the method can just be swapped out with the new one.
I've been tinkering with implementation on this end. Lots of little hurdles backporting from juce 8. Got a huge stack trace to work out, but I've been too swamped to complete

@Christoph-Hart Would you want to give me a "this is how I would do it" outline and I could take a run at it? Just trying to manage the pitchforks.

@d-healey Can you use getSampleLength() to calculate the 0-1 value?
Something like:

var totalSamples = currentSample.getSampleLength();

var offsetSamples = (offsetMs * sampleRate) / 1000;

var normalizedOffset = offsetSamples / totalSamples;

And then use the normalizedOffset value for your modulator?

An audience defined by your pixel will almost always deliver better results because META knows exactly who to deliver the ad to.
The Advantage+ audience is really good at creating brand awareness. Use a lookalike audience of your website visitor and then create placements that promote your brand. The goal isn't to make conversions with these, it's about reaching people that don't know you yet.

@HISEnberg I haven't used it since.

@Christoph-Hart No rush. Just checking in for a friendly ETA.

@aaronventure I've created an app that displays the system ID with the Engine.getSystemID() function. I was looking for something that displayed the items in the system that were used to create the numbers.
Ultimately, it looks like there's a fix available from JUCE. Looking forward to the update

@Christoph-Hart I think this is the issue:
https://github.com/juce-framework/JUCE/commit/120f9266dc881c81371109c69b37a0a246accdeb

Is this fix already implemented?

I'm using JUCE_USE_BETTER_MACHINE_IDS=1 in my new project. It's mostly working well, but I have a couple Windows 11 users that have to reactivate their license every few reboots. Is there a way to list the devices that are used to create this number so I can debug what is changing on their system?

@aaronventure Damn... Just tested and it works like you said. Happy days!

@Christoph-Hart I was just following your Latency Test repo

@Morphoice After pulling the latest commit, this message now pops up every time I start HISE.

@aaronventure scriptFX is the only place you can access the processBlock to call Engine.setLatencySamples()

@aaronventure said in HISE FX and delay compensation:

@Dan-Korneff can you measure the latency of your modules, put it in consts and make the call to set the new latency to report whenever the user changes any of the controls that affect it?

That's definitely plan B. I guess I need to use a global variable to get this data into scriptFX?

I could use some suggestions on how to improve my approach to handling latency in my projects. I've currently been manually measuring latency and compensating for it based on which DSP nodes and oversampling are active. While this works well for static latency, I’m running into a challenge when I need to dynamically update the latency.
Right now, I’m using:
prepareToPlay() to get the initial latency with Engine.getLatencySamples()
processBlock() to set latency using setLatencySamples()
This works well for static latencies, but now that I’m introducing multiple oversampling filters, I need to adjust latency dynamically, depending on whether the user selects Linear-Phase or Minimum-Phase filtering. Since Linear-Phase filtering can add up to ~120 samples, I don’t want to set a fixed latency that high, as it would negatively impact real-time usage.
I need a way to recalculate latency when the processing mode changes. For example, when switching between oversampling filters. The goal is to update latency based on active DSP modules.
@Christoph-Hart or anyone else have suggestions on how to dynamically recalculate the latency?

@Christoph-Hart

Ok... I've obviously have not had enough coffee today. I'd probably have to export the plugin after I rebuild HISE for something to take effect.
Ignore my stupidity for now.

It appears to be something with the exported plugin. The machine IDs generated with JUCE_USE_BETTER_MACHINE_IDS=1 are the same as if it's set to false. At least I know where to start looking

@ustk I've changed the preprocessor in the module like this:

Still the same result

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong here, but HISE and my compiled plugin can't agree on a "better" machine ID.

I've compiled HISE like this:

and added this to my project:

When I launch the plugin, it detects that the ID is different and I update my license file. Then when I load HISE, it still thinks that the ID is different. What am I doing wrong?