>Hi Majik, > >majik wrote: > >>---Here is an email I sent a little while ago to Kai Vehmanen: >> >> >> >>> I have been looking through the Soundtracker 0.6.7 code as I have >>> been >>>wanting to improve the jack output. It would be excellent if Soundtracker >>>could output each of its channels to a Jack port, instead of (as well as?) >>>outputting the mix the two mono channels. Unfortunately, Im only a beginner >>>when it comes to audio coding and was wondering if someone could hack it >>>together for me? >>> >>> >> >> >>---And his reponse: >> >>that would be a cool feature to have, but unfortunately not a trivial >>thing to add (though not impossible either). You could try to ask about >>this on the soundtracker mailing list (or possible on linux-audio-dev)... >>maybe someone else is also interested and has the time to help. >>Unfortunately I don't have much time for FOSS-development atm, so I'll >>have to pass. .( >> >> >>---Will anyone help with this? I believe that the problem is that the mixer >>code works in a monolithic way, thus needs a rewrite. >> >> >> >This issue's been discussed on the soundtracker mailing list, months ago. > >Here's a quote from Yury Aliaev, a Soundtracker contributor : > ><quote> >In the current state of ST such a thing (multichannel output) is almost >impossible because of the monolitic structure of the mixer code. The >optimal way to solve this is (I mean) rewriting the whole mixer in the >modular way. This also will make ST more flexible and universal and, in >particular, will make adding new effects (including LADSPA processing) >more easy. > >Currently I have some ideas how to do this (but still have no free time >for this :( ), but there is another way: libremix written by Conrad >Parker (see remix.sf.net) seems to be good for this purpose. ></quote> > > >A question I asked, a few weeks later : > ><quote> > >> About per track JACK outputs : In your answer to Emiliano Grilli, on >> june 1st, you explain that this needs a big rewrite. But do you >> believe a sort of hack is possible ? Like a small patch that lies >> around for those (I like JACK :) who need this feature before >> soundtracker engine gets rewritten... If yes, any advise ? Does it >> imply playing with the mixer assembly routines ? > ></quote> > >And Yury's answer : > ><quote> >Unfortunately, it will be a havy hack of assembler routines :( Because >they mix sounds from different channels directly after resampling, >rather then write to the separate buffers and then mix them. This is why >I decided to rewrite the mixer entirely rather then inventing kludges... ></quote> > > >Hope it helps... Yury may have started to rewrite the mixer. > >Regards > >-- > og
Yes, I did see this, I just wanted to re-illuminate the topic and appeal through LAD to see if anyone did have some free time to develop this, as I feel it would be such a great feature. Matthew Carey