Hello every one....

I have a problem of synchronizing my patch..is this is the right term to use.

When I run my patch the first time I have a result X, and when I run it the
second time I have a result Y, and the third time i have again the X result
and then the Y result and so on....and i cannot really figure out what i have
done wrong...

The main idea of my patch is:

[inlet~]
/ \
/ \
[compute spectra~] [compute pitch~]
| |
\ /
\ /
[compute jitter~]
|
[outlet~]

One idea that I had is that maybe my patches [compute spectra~] and
[compute pitch~] take different time to produce an output so I will have
to use a delay...but how can I count the time each one needs??

But is this the problem, or it has to do with my cpu? or the buffer that i use??

probably in one of the two subpatches you use objects that are heavier than in the other (maybe like fft).
you can outlet two bangs (one per subpatch) and compare them with [timer]

Yes you are right...i use fft with 2048 block size.
All the objects that I use are ~ objects, how can I give a bang as an outlet?

How do I know that the output is not garbage?? and that the subpatch is actually finished?

Maybe try sticking them both in the same subpatch with a 2048 block size?

They are in the same subpatch with the same blocksize...

But what i cannot really understand is why I get two different results for the same input....do you have any idea what that could be???

the block size is 2048 samples, so your block is going to be calculated from a different position every time, within that range of 2048 samples.

to get it exactly the same, you'd need to reset the block at the same time as triggering your processes. i don't think there is any easy way to retrigger the block though.

ahh, this MIGHT work:

the help file for [switch~] says: "switch~ takes a bang message that causes one block of dsp to be computed"

if you put [switch~] in your subpatches instead of [block~] and bang them both at the same time, then that may help?

Just to get this right....if I use [block~ 2048 1 1] this means that my computation starts in a random position of this block?? I thought that block object just
increased the incoming block size, just splitting my input in bigger frames...I had
no idea that is a "random" object.

I tried your suggestion, which if I may say sounded great, but unfortunately it
does not work. In my patch I also use 50% ovelap.
So what I did after I read your idea was to replace [block~ 2048 2 1] with

[X]
|
[metro 50]
|
[switch~ 2048 2 1]

And it immediately crashed PD. So then I just eliminated the overlap, it run for some seconds and it crashed again...

Honestly I have no clue how it might be fixed or even what is going on