I think we’re slightly talking past each other.
Part of what I’m asking is the literal nuts and bolts of what nnnsvd is doing, since the help and reference are super minimal and ambiguous in places. So I’m not really sure how it’s supposed to work and how you use it in conjunction with fluid.bufnmf~. Like in a literal sense. As it looks to me, chaining them together is computing the activations/bases twice, or refining them.
My questions and qualifiers/adjectives around @coverage (good/unique) are only to try to understand what “preserved” means in the reference file. I have no musical opinions here. I’m just trying to ask what is being preserved and what does preservation mean in this context.
The second bit is more about trying to leverage what I think nnnsvd is doing (as you initially explained it a few months ago), since it looks like a useful way to have it tell me, algorithmically, how many components I should break any given buffer in to.
With fluid.bufnmf~ I can specify this already, and I can do this by whatever means I want, but in terms of my workflows and interest, I’ve not really wanted to oversplit and combine etc… because I don’t generally find that kind of stuff too interesting (again, this is a personal taste thing). So other than arbitrarily splitting things into two, or 500, I’ve not done much beyond that.
What I’m trying to do at the moment is be able to take an arbitrary buffer/sample and break it into n amount of components. If I can use nnnsvd to give me a rough idea of what n should be, great!