Re: [linux-audio-dev] DSP resources
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Juhana Sadeharju wrote: From:Tommi Ilmonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] There is a small low-level high-performance DSP library (C++) that is distributed with Mustajuuri. I am intentionally keeping it small and very stand-alone. Right now there are only a few filter classes and delay lines. I have a few compression and limiter algorithms as well, but those have been put to the Mustajuuri plugins. I consider them mildly too complex for a low-level DSP lib. I still would like to suggest to make clear difference between the actual code and the plug-in wrapping. It would be quite simple to have compressor/limiter functions which are then used in various plug-in wrappings. You may well be right. The current situation goes like this: 1) There is a low-level DSP lib (filters and delay lines). 2) There are some DSP algorithms that rely on the DSP lib. 3) The Mustajuuri plugins use level 2 objects for DSP. For example an array of level 2 compressors can be used to make one multichannel compressor (wit user interface etc.). Right now the levels 2 and 3 are located in the same source files even tough they are not particularly dependent on each other. It would be fairly easy to move all level-2 code to level-1 library = merge levels 1 and 2 rather that levels 2 and 3. The reason I have not done this yet is that I have been developing level 2 stuff and parts of it are not 100% stable. I like the low-level lib to be maximally stable. At the moment it would be reasonable to move most of level-2 to level-1 without losing stability in the low-level lib. Tommi.
[linux-audio-dev] Re: lawsuit
yo! yesterday i tried ProTools LE, and i liked it very much. i'm planning my sequencer-synthesizer-multitracker stuff since cca 2 years, but this Broadcast-suit made me unhappy. if i make a GPLed stuff with the features of ProTools, Cubase and Reaktor3, will Digidesign, Steinberg and NI sue me for ripping their ideas? if so, how can i avoid it? just call every feature somehow else than the original? -- Racz, Mate linux + IT professional audio software developer
Re: [linux-audio-dev] Re: lawsuit
On Thu, 13 Sep 2001, Racz, Mate wrote: i'm planning my sequencer-synthesizer-multitracker stuff since cca 2 years, What's CCA? if i make a GPLed stuff with the features of ProTools, Cubase and Reaktor3, will Digidesign, Steinberg and NI sue me for ripping their ideas? Please don't waste your time re-implementing existing technology. You have a clean slate, do it better. Digidesign, Steinberg, NI, et al. may (or may not) have patents but they don't have a monopoly on good ideas. Established commercial software companies have a base of legacy software that they have to support. They also have a management structure that will try to dampen any innovation that wouldn't be immediately profitable. Therefore, they release incremental improvements and hype them to death. OTOH, Open Source programmers have more room to experiment. Why don't you add some new and fun features instead? Here are some ideas for you to experiment with: send control messages over a network, convert movements captured by a webcam into control messages, implement a 3D interface with OpenGL, make a softsynth with a more unusual form of synthesis: formant, granular, etc. if so, how can i avoid it? just call every feature somehow else than the original? Rather than duplicating a commercial program feature by feature, Why don't you find some actual users (esp. non-programmers) and ask them what they *really* want? Don't be satisfied with answers about how they currently use existing commercial programs. Find out what they dream of doing and try to develop a solution that actually meets those needs. -- kevin at kevindumpscore dot com
RE: [linux-audio-dev] Re: lawsuit
-Original Message- From: Kevin Conder ... i'm planning my sequencer-synthesizer-multitracker stuff since cca 2 years, What's CCA? cca = approximately erik
