# Are there ways to speed up bufnmfcross' performance?

**URL:** https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/are-there-ways-to-speed-up-bufnmfcross-performance/1218
**Category:** Usage Questions
**Created:** [January 31, 2022, 3:08pm UTC](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/are-there-ways-to-speed-up-bufnmfcross-performance/1218 "2022-01-31T15:08:48Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 31

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![tremblap](https://discourse.flucoma.org/user_avatar/discourse.flucoma.org/tremblap/32/5_2.png) [@tremblap](https://discourse.flucoma.org/u/tremblap)
#### Post date: [June 17, 2025, 7:15am UTC](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/are-there-ways-to-speed-up-bufnmfcross-performance/1218/31 "2025-06-17T07:15:35Z")

</div>

> [@dequalsrxt](#):
>
> there’s still the problem of longer sounds even after that process.

As explained above, the process will take a lot longer as sounds get longer. Square the time. So if a 10 second sound is processed in 5 sec, a 20 second sound will take 25 sec, and a 40 sec sound will take 33 minutes… so the shorter the sound the much much more efficient the process will be.

> [@dequalsrxt](#):
>
> I don’t know how to get from the 2d dataset to something that I can use for the bufnmfcross operation.

The idea is not ‘for bufnmfcross’ but to remove duplicate sounds (so you have less sounds to process). The idea is to describe the sounds somehow (MFCCs might do) then map them in 2d with UMAP (the cleverest way we have to do dimension redux) then to use grid to force that map on to a 2d equidistant plane. Then, you skip boxes:

1 2 3  
4 5 6  
7 8 9

if you keep 1 3 5 7 9, or 2 4 6 8, you have a ‘downsampled’ dataset that is more representative (covers a wider space) than taking 1 2 3 4.

Does it make sense?

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.flucoma.org/t/are-there-ways-to-speed-up-bufnmfcross-performance/1218)._