I’m interested in understanding a little more how the VCV Rack code (not the modules but the core engine) works. I’ve been browsing the code a bit, but I was wondering if anyone has any advice for which files to concentrate on, and/or if there is a discussion of the VCV architecture somewhere? The …

there is no BLOCK concept in the PROCESS for a single module the module processes a single SAMPLE YES if you need blocks to do some DSP processing (example an FFT) you need an intermediate buffer and YES the buffer will introduce a delay and YES if you chain the OUT of module using a block proce…

Thanks for the detailed response – that helps a lot and more-or-less confirms what I understood about the code. I wonder why the architecture for modules wasn’t made to be block-based rather than sample-based (other than ease of implementation), since this could get rid of the additivity of latency…

at start I had the same doubts how can an architecture “single sample process” can deal with the overhead of the call chain ? In my mind the block processing was so superior so I did my first real test, I’ve ported an open source reverb, called MVERB, and I was astonished: it worked (referred the…

The idea of single sample processing is an interesting one, and it obviously works (with VCV rack as a nice existence proof). I think it simplifies things too, since the specific ordering of modules is not important. On the other hand, it means that the latency introduced by a chain of block-based…

[image] coreyker: On the other hand, with block-based module processing the overall latency would just be 1*blocksize since no internal buffering is needed. But the ordering of modules in the DSP graph becomes important in this case… I guess this is only true if the graph is a tree or forest.…

I’m not following what you mean there… (But yes I’m referring to the case of trees or forests, i.e., with no feedback). The blocksize delay can’t ever be removed though since we need to buffer a certain number of samples, e.g., with a block based processor like the FFT

Yes, this is what I meant. But a modular system that only allows wiring in form of trees or forests would be quite… boring, I think. Isn’t this the limitiation that most DAWs use for VSTs etc.?

That isn’t correct what I said, a loop-free graph would suffice. A restriction on trees or forests is not necessary.

Yes, when you consider feedback (loops), single cycle processing would indeed seem like a better choice…

VCV Community

Spelunking in the VCV code

Development

Coirt (Phil Golden) July 20, 2019, 7:51pm 11

Any interest in a (100% unofficial, third party) tour of Rack's codebase? Development

Hi all–life got hectic but I’m still planning on doing this (although it’ll go slowly…) I’ll start as soon as v1.1.0 is released.

show post in topic

Home
Categories
Guidelines
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy

Powered by Discourse, best viewed with JavaScript enabled