@KMETE said:
I was wondering if there is any difference between multiple sf-play2~ or readsf~ in term of memory usage?
[stereofile] loads the contents into RAM. (sf-play2~ is only the player, not the loader, but it depends on audio data loaded into RAM by stereofile.)
readsf~ streams from disk so its RAM usage should be much smaller.
One of the reasons why I worked on stereofile and sf-play2~ is that I think if you tell it to play an audio file at rate = 1, then it should sound like the file's normal speed at any Pd sample rate. Pd's built-in [tabplay~] does not do this -- if the system sample rate differs from the file's rate, it will play faster or slower than normal. That is, system settings affect the patch's behavior
. I think [readsf~] also has this problem but I haven't checked, could be wrong about that.
hjh