Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 19:25, Steve Harris wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:18:45PM +0200, Marco Ballini wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 18:20, Paul Davis wrote: > > > discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide > > > attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. > > Does this mean that the decision process is driven by commercial > > interests. > > Partly, but many of the contributors are Free Software people, and IIRC the > final SDK will be released under a Free Software friendly licence. > > > Are they developing an API with the same philosophy of LADSPA? > > No, we allready have a LADSPA, its intended to include events and other > things that are missing form LADSPA. with "philosophy" I meant (sorry for my english): designed to be an "open" API. Maybe I'm wrong (and please correct me) but the the issues regaurding future use and development of such an API are not only related to the license but also with the design process. Best regards -Marco
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
> > Hello. Can anyone report what is going on with the EU software patents? > > How they would affect immediately the audio and graphics development > > we are doing? Xine? Sodipodi? Others? > > I suppose you wouldn't be allowed to control one oscillator's > frequency with the output of another oscillator using more than about > 10 Hz because that is Frequency Modulation and Yamaha has a patent on > that. But I'm no lawyer. The FM patents expired a while ago... I may be _completely_ wrong but I seem to remember they did not cover the principle of fm for audio synthesis but a certain implementation in hardware. -- Fernando
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
Hallo, Paul Winkler hat gesagt: // Paul Winkler wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:36:59PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote: > > I suppose you wouldn't be allowed to control one oscillator's > > frequency with the output of another oscillator using more than about > > 10 Hz because that is Frequency Modulation and Yamaha has a patent on > > that. But I'm no lawyer. > > Oh that's just absurd. What are they going to do? I should have added a :) smiley, because this was intended to be absurd or to show, how absurd software patents can get. Everyone I guess knows that Amazon patented the "On-Click" method. I wanted to say that those things exist in music software, too. Maybe FM synthesis is not a good example, because this technique is actually more complex than Amazon's. > Sue John Chowning who claims to have invented FM audio synthesis > way back in the 70s? I now did a bit more research on that and I was a bit wrong: The patent is Standford's and Yamaha is a licensee. Also this patent seems to have expired 1995. But not without achieving this: "Stanford's FM synthesis patent, which expired two years ago, was the second biggest money maker in campus history. It brought in more than $20 million." (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/news/report/news/july16/sondiusxg.html) I think, several Waveguide patents also developed at Stanford are still valid. Also the documentation of Perry Cooks STK says: "The basic Chowning/Stanford FM patent expired in 1995, but there exist follow-on patents, mostly assigned to Yamaha. If you are of the type who should worry about this (making money) worry away." > Sue every radio station in the world? I think, the patent only covered the use of FM in a musical instrument. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 12:51, Paul Winkler wrote: > Sue every radio station in the world? Then again, Major Armstrong did give RCA a hard time back in the 50s. Slightly different baseband frequency range, though... :) Cheers! |-| | Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Director of Broadcast Software Development | | Salem Radio Labs | http://www.salemradiolabs.com/| |-| | WASHINGTON DC: Fifty square miles almost completely surrounded by | | reality.| |-|
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LilyPond 2.0 - make beautiful music prints
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 15:56, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > LilyPond version 2.0 was released today. And I've only just finished compiling 1.8! Chris
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:18:45PM +0200, Marco Ballini wrote: > On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 18:20, Paul Davis wrote: > > discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide > > attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. > Does this mean that the decision process is driven by commercial > interests. Partly, but many of the contributors are Free Software people, and IIRC the final SDK will be released under a Free Software friendly licence. > Are they developing an API with the same philosophy of LADSPA? No, we allready have a LADSPA, its intended to include events and other things that are missing form LADSPA. > How close is this new API to XAP? Its still in the requirements phase, so I cant really say. - Steve
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:18:45PM +0200, Marco Ballini wrote: > On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 18:20, Paul Davis wrote: > > discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide > > attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. > Does this mean that the decision process is driven by commercial > interests. > If yes, is there a place for an open API (maybe LGPL, but still to > define)? > Are they developing an API with the same philosophy of LADSPA? > How close is this new API to XAP? We've been over this before. Search the linux-audio-dev archives for GMPI. -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Look! Up in the sky! It's QUOTTY FINGERS KID! (random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:21:33PM +0100, Steve Harris wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:44:43PM +0200, Marco Ballini wrote: > > So, what happened to XAP? > > GMPI: > http://aulos.calarts.edu/pipermail/music-dsp/2003-February/022272.html > > > Is this list the right place for discussion on it? > > I think XAP has been put on hold. GMPI is a much more promising project, > though its progressing quite slowly. I've laid all my hopes on GMPI. If the GMPI process continues to hurt so much, maybe XAP should progress asynchronously. It can always adapt to GMPI later. -- Notice that as computers are becoming easier and easier to use, suddenly there's a big market for "Dummies" books. Cause and effect, or merely an ironic juxtaposition of unrelated facts?
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
>On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 18:20, Paul Davis wrote: >> discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide >> attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. >Does this mean that the decision process is driven by commercial >interests. its driven by a desire to *avoid* vendor/proprietary lockin. plugin writers (and users) are tired of dealing with 5/6/7/8 different plugin APIs. GMPI will eventually be controlled by the MIDI Manufacturers Assoc, and is intended to be an open specification in the same way that MIDI is.
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 05:36:59PM +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote: > Hallo, > Juhana Sadeharju hat gesagt: // Juhana Sadeharju wrote: > > > Hello. Can anyone report what is going on with the EU software patents? > > How they would affect immediately the audio and graphics development > > we are doing? Xine? Sodipodi? Others? > > I suppose you wouldn't be allowed to control one oscillator's > frequency with the output of another oscillator using more than about > 10 Hz because that is Frequency Modulation and Yamaha has a patent on > that. But I'm no lawyer. Oh that's just absurd. What are they going to do? Sue John Chowning who claims to have invented FM audio synthesis way back in the 70s? Sue MIT, who have FM opcodes in csound? Sue every radio station in the world? -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com Look! Up in the sky! It's DARK THIGH WEARING A HAT! (random hero from isometric.spaceninja.com)
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 07:44:43PM +0200, Marco Ballini wrote: > So, what happened to XAP? GMPI: http://aulos.calarts.edu/pipermail/music-dsp/2003-February/022272.html > Is this list the right place for discussion on it? I think XAP has been put on hold. GMPI is a much more promising project, though its progressing quite slowly. - Steve
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
On Wed, 2003-09-24 at 18:20, Paul Davis wrote: > discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide > attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. Does this mean that the decision process is driven by commercial interests. If yes, is there a place for an open API (maybe LGPL, but still to define)? Are they developing an API with the same philosophy of LADSPA? How close is this new API to XAP?
Re: [linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
>So, what happened to XAP? >Is this list the right place for discussion on it? >Would it be better to add my ideas to "XAP spec - early scribbles" >(e-mail from Tim Hockin on 4 February 2003) or to put them in an >indipendent form? discussion about it moved to the GMPI list. GMPI is an industry-wide attempt to define a platform+vendor neutral music plugin API. majordomo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] archives: http://www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
[linux-audio-dev] what happened to XAP?
I'm following the LADSPA and XAP discussions from the beginning. I've some ideas about audio plugins I've been thinking about since 2001. What I really wanted was an audio plugin API for: - a music composition environment - real-time music performances All my ideas led to a sketch of an event-oriented API. So many things are common to (what I read of) XAP that I wanted to join the discussion, but unfortunately I had no time to do that. I now have some free time and I would like to share my ideas with others (a new API is a big effort). So, what happened to XAP? Is this list the right place for discussion on it? Would it be better to add my ideas to "XAP spec - early scribbles" (e-mail from Tim Hockin on 4 February 2003) or to put them in an indipendent form? Thanks for any answer, - Marco
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
Hallo, Juhana Sadeharju hat gesagt: // Juhana Sadeharju wrote: > Hello. Can anyone report what is going on with the EU software patents? > How they would affect immediately the audio and graphics development > we are doing? Xine? Sodipodi? Others? I suppose you wouldn't be allowed to control one oscillator's frequency with the output of another oscillator using more than about 10 Hz because that is Frequency Modulation and Yamaha has a patent on that. But I'm no lawyer. ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__
[linux-audio-dev] LilyPond 2.0 - make beautiful music prints
Dear music enthousiasts,
LilyPond version 2.0 was released today. LilyPond is an automated
music notation system: it is used to make gorgeous sheet music. It is
libre software ("open source"), and available for most Unix flavors,
including Linux and MacOS X, and MS Windows.
Use it for your music too!
For this version, we have dramatically simplified many parts of the
syntax, making it easier to use than ever before. Other improvements
include quarter-tone accidentals, and conditional inclusion of music
fragments. With version 2.0, we have a solid platform for working on
notation and typography features for coming versions.
Downloads, examples and documentation are available from the website,
http://lilypond.org
A big thank-you goes out to our hackers and bughunters: Mats
Bengtsson, Heikki Junes, Juergen Reuter, Antonio Palama, Benjamin
Milde, Daniel Berjon Diez, David Bobroff, David Rayleigh Arnold, Erik
Ronstroem, Fabio dos Santos, Fodor Bertalan, Frederic Bron, Graham
Parcival, Ian Bailey-Mortimer, John Williams, Josza Marton, Marco
Caliari, Matthieu Amiguet, Michael Welsh Duggan, Patrick Atamaniuk,
Paul Scott, Pedro Kroeger, Peter Lutek, Richard Schoeller, Thorkil
Wolvendans, and Werner Trobin
Happy music printing,
Han-Wen Nienhuys & Jan Nieuwenhuizen
(core development team)
New features in 2.0 since 1.8
*
* Crescendos can now be drawn dotted or dashed.
* Quarter tones are now supported. They are entered by suffixing
`ih' for a half-sharp and `eh' for a half-flat. Hence, the
following is an ascending list of pitches:
ceses ceseh ces ceh c cih cis cisih cisis
* The following constructs have been removed from the syntax:
\duration #SCHEME-DURATION
\pitch #SCHEME-PITCH
\outputproperty FUNC SYMBOL = VALUE
For `\outputproperty', the following may be substituted:
\applyoutput #(outputproperty-compatibility FUNC
SYMBOL VALUE)
* Clefs may now be transposed arbitrarily, for example
\clef "G_8"
\clef "G_15"
\clef "G_9"
* The syntax for chords and simultaneous music have changed. Chords
are entered as
while simultaneous music is entered as
<<..MUSIC LIST..>>
In effect, the meanings of both have been swapped relative to
their 1.8 definition. The syntax for lists in `\markup' has
changed alongside, but figured bass mode was not changed, i.e.:
\markup { \center <..LIST OF MARKUPS..> }
\figure { }
As chords the more often used than simultaneous music, this change
will save keystrokes.
* Each music expression can now be tagged, to make different printed
versions from the same music expression. In the following example,
we see two versions of a piece of music, one for the full score,
and one with cue notes for the instrumental part:
<< \tag #'part <<
{ c4 f2 g4 } % in the part, we have cue-notes
\\ R1 >>
\tag #'score R1 % in the score: only a rest
>>
The same can be applied to articulations, texts, etc.: they are
made by prepending
-\tag #YOUR-TAGS
to an articulation, for example,
c4-\tag #'with-fingerings -4 -\tag #'with-strings \6
This defines a note, which has a conditional fingering and a
string-number indication.
* The settings for chord-fingering are more flexible. You can
specify a list where fingerings may be placed, eg.
\property Voice.fingeringOrientations = #'(left down)
This will put the fingering for the lowest note below the chord,
and the rest to the left.
* The script previously known as `ly2dvi' has been renamed to
`lilypond'. The binary itself is now installed as `lilypond-bin'.
* Markup text (ie. general text formatting) may now be used for
lyrics too.
* Two new commands for grace notes have been added, `\acciaccatura'
and `\appoggiatura',
\appoggiatura f8 e4
\acciaccatura g8 f4
Both reflect the traditional meanings of acciaccatura and
appogiatura, and both insert insert a slur from the first grace
note to the main note.
* Layout options for grace notes are now stored in a context
property, and may now be set separately from musical content.
* The `\new' command will create a context with a unique name
automatically. Hence, for multi-staff scores, it is no longer
necessary to invent arbitrary context names. For example, a
two-staff score may be created by
\simultaneous {
\new Staff { NOTES FOR 1ST STAFF }
\new Staff { NOTES FOR 2ND STAFF }
}
* Octave checks make octave errors easier to correct. The syntax is
\octave PITCH
This checks t
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
> Juhana, would you happen to have any pointers to the media coverage on this? > It's been a non-issue in the North American media. http://swpat.ffii.org/ cheers -- Tim Orford
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
On Wednesday 24 September 2003 05:59, Juhana Sadeharju wrote: > They were more conserned about how companies' > money escapes from research and development to the patent lawyers > when companies *have to* start patenting. (It looks like professional > politicians do not realize that nobody forces to patent anything.) Certainly, nobody is "forced" to take out a patent, in the sense that there is no *legally* compelling reason to do so. However, if you are operating in a business envrionment where your competitors routinely patent techniques, the result will be that you will end up having to do so as well, if only to protect your own work from being co-opted by others and then denied to you on the basis of some bogus patent claim. That being the case, the concerns expressed about funds "escaping" to attorneys sound pretty much on the mark. It'd be a bonanza for patent lawyers. Juhana, would you happen to have any pointers to the media coverage on this? It's been a non-issue in the North American media. Cheers! |-| | Frederick F. Gleason, Jr. | Director of Broadcast Software Development | | Salem Radio Labs | http://www.salemradiolabs.com/| |-| | It is one thing to praise discipline, and another to submit to it.| | -- Cervantes | |-|
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:59:32PM +0300, Juhana Sadeharju wrote: > I would like to propose the following: if EU gets the software > patents, then should non-profit open source community and non-profit > academic researchers get patents for free. Then we would be in > equally competitive situation. IMHO, the current patent system > discriminate us. That doesnt help. The basic problem (AFAIK) is that if a big company gets a patenent covering something youre working on (even if you have prior art) there nothing you can do about it, if they take you to court you cant afford to fight them and you will either have to give in or go bankrupt. - Steve
Re: [linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
directBOX Reply --- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To : [EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 24.09.2003 12:07:26 Hello. Can anyone report what is going on with the EU software patents? How they would affect immediately the audio and graphics development we are doing? Xine? Sodipodi? Others? - Well, they'd affect everything; Software patents (or "logical algorythmic patents") are a disaster. You know the status bar in an Installing application like "Install Shield Wizzard" ? Well, with these patents ONE firm could own these structure; EVERY other application would use this kind of algorythmic would be forbidden . greetz, sascha retzki __ Verpassen Sie keine eBay-Auktion und bieten Sie bequem und schnell über das Telefon mit http://www.telefonbieten.de Ihre eMails auf dem Handy lesen - ohne Zeitverlust - 24h/Tag eMail, FAX, SMS, VoiceMail mit http://www.directbox.com
[linux-audio-dev] EU software patents?
Hello. Can anyone report what is going on with the EU software patents? How they would affect immediately the audio and graphics development we are doing? Xine? Sodipodi? Others? Yesterday news broadcasting made not a big case how EU software patents affects us. They were more conserned about how companies' money escapes from research and development to the patent lawyers when companies *have to* start patenting. (It looks like professional politicians do not realize that nobody forces to patent anything.) Other worry was that then big companies collects patent portfolios and thus puts small companies to trouble. Again, no worry about us. It was only at evening news that one channel mentioned Linux, but no politicians seemed to worry about Linux or us. -*- I would like to propose the following: if EU gets the software patents, then should non-profit open source community and non-profit academic researchers get patents for free. Then we would be in equally competitive situation. IMHO, the current patent system discriminate us. Patenteer for sure use anything we develop, but for sure they are protecting even triviallest "invention". Please, don't say we have *choosed* not to patent anything. I have choosed not to patent only because there is no income in writing free software. I have invented tens of non-trivial and trivial techniques. It would have been great if the free/open source community would have a 20 years monopoly for these techniques. (As a non-profit institution we cannot get royalties from the patent, right? We would use them to block commercial products for using the techniques.) Best regards, Juhana
