Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Great link for non native English speakers! Thanks!! Sebastien - Original Message - From: "Antti Boman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, 12 December, 2002 11:21 Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths > > I knew but you took me with you ;) There's a great site at > http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors explaining > common English mistakes we non-english persons do. (Intentional mistakes > added to the previous sentence ;) >
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Frank Barknecht wrote: Antti Boman schrieb: Uh, funny, doubled the mistake of wetting and not whetting. Ooops, my fault. I didn't know that those were different "w[h]et"s... I knew but you took me with you ;) There's a great site at http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/errors/errors.html#errors explaining common English mistakes we non-english persons do. (Intentional mistakes added to the previous sentence ;) Regarding the quicktoot: It explains how my angriff-drummachine for Pd works and was build. You could try to find out yourself at my site, http://footils.org until I really do finish the Toot. Ok, I'll take a deeper look. -a
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Antti Boman schrieb: > Antti Boman wrote: > > Frank Barknecht wrote: > > > >> To wet your appetite: I really should finish my PD quicktoot, which > >> even in its current unfinished form is longer then three standard > >> quicktoots :( > > > > You wet my appetite so that I have to ask if there's a version online > > for a quick look beforehand. A question mark. > > Uh, funny, doubled the mistake of wetting and not whetting. Ooops, my fault. I didn't know that those were different "w[h]et"s... Regarding the quicktoot: It explains how my angriff-drummachine for Pd works and was build. You could try to find out yourself at my site, http://footils.org until I really do finish the Toot. ciao -- Frank Barknecht
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:09:58 +, Steve Harris wrote > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 12:47:50 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote: > > It also means getting midi signal routing working, as currently ssm has no > > polyphonic means of note signalling, but it's fairly trivial. The only thing > > is that it will break the everything plugs into anything rule :( > > It shouldn't have to. There are plenty of polyphonic modular > implementations that still just have audio and control data. I'd like to avoid having a global polyphony for ssm really. It's a bit more flexible if you can set different levels of polyphony for different subpatches, and more cpu friendly too. If anyone is interested BTW, there is a new version of ssm availible at sourceforge at the moment, which along with a lot of other new stuff, has a LADSPA GUI generator (thanks to Mike Rawes): http://sourceforge.net/projects/spiralmodular dave
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Antti Boman wrote: Frank Barknecht wrote: To wet your appetite: I really should finish my PD quicktoot, which even in its current unfinished form is longer then three standard quicktoots :( You wet my appetite so that I have to ask if there's a version online for a quick look beforehand. A question mark. Uh, funny, doubled the mistake of wetting and not whetting. Sorry about this spam. -a
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 12:47:50 +0100, Dave Griffiths wrote: > It also means getting midi signal routing working, as currently ssm has no > polyphonic means of note signalling, but it's fairly trivial. The only thing > is that it will break the everything plugs into anything rule :( It shouldn't have to. There are plenty of polyphonic modular implementations that still just have audio and control data. - Steve
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:58:32 -0800, Paul Winkler wrote > On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:18:53PM +, Steve Harris wrote: > > I'm not quite sure how either of them handle that newfangled poly-phoney > > that seems so popular these days ;) > > AFAICT, they both punt and do everything monophonic. There are plans to make ssm polyphonic. It entails implementing subpatches, so you can group patches together into one module (like pd) which are then instanced internally per voice. A subpatch will have two types of input, global and per-voice - the per-voice input is distributed to the multiple instances, the global sent to all at once. The output will be mixed to a normal monophonic output, so you can go on to process it with effects etc. It also means getting midi signal routing working, as currently ssm has no polyphonic means of note signalling, but it's fairly trivial. The only thing is that it will break the everything plugs into anything rule :( dave
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Frank Barknecht wrote: To wet your appetite: I really should finish my PD quicktoot, which even in its current unfinished form is longer then three standard quicktoots :( You wet my appetite so that I have to ask if there's a version online for a quick look beforehand. A question mark. -a
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Hi, Paul Winkler hat gesagt: // Paul Winkler wrote: > PD can handle polyphony, and is about as modular as they come; > but I don't really understand PD yet. :) To wet your appetite: I really should finish my PD quicktoot, which even in its current unfinished form is longer then three standard quicktoots :( ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__
RE: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Yep, pd and suchlike excellent environments for putting together networks. However, other applications don't import pd patches or instruments and there is no way to share softsynths on Linux. Hence the current API debate. What I'd like to see is a simple XML format for LADSPA plugin networks and instruments. PNet is a bit of a red herring - it's value would be as a tiny testbed host and a source of reference code to stuff into other hosts as needed. Admittedly LADSPA's current lack of a string data type would make coding of sample-based instruments difficult... --Richard -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Frank Barknecht Sent: 10 December 2002 22:51 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths Hi, Richard Furse hat gesagt: // Richard Furse wrote: > Just an observation about an alternative path on softsynths: a LADSPA plugin > or network can be used easily enough as a softsynth using control-voltage > (CV) approaches (a few already exist). It's just a matter of agreeing the > conventions - implementation is trivial. > > I've been meaning to finish writing PNet for a while (I've mentioned it a > few times) - essentially an environment where LADSPA plugins are strung > together to form a "patch" and are wired up to "standard" CV controls for > pitch, velocity, MIDI CC etc. I wonder, how this differs from the approach in Pure Data (Pd). The [plugin~] Pd-external can load LADSPA plugins and connects them to the rest of the signal world. I think, Alsa Modular Synth or SSM do something similar, but I didn't use those for a long time. Or do I miss the point and PNet is something to build an object file to load inside another application? A LADSPA-Meta-plugin? ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:18:53PM +, Steve Harris wrote: > I'm not quite sure how either of them handle that newfangled poly-phoney > that seems so popular these days ;) AFAICT, they both punt and do everything monophonic. PD can handle polyphony, and is about as modular as they come; but I don't really understand PD yet. :) -- Paul Winkler http://www.slinkp.com "Welcome to Muppet Labs, where the future is made - today!"
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 07:11:51PM -, Richard Furse wrote: > pure-LADSPA networks. BTW, is anyone doing this already? If so, 50% of the > code is already done. ;-) I'm thinking in terms of defining a synth using > two patches - one to define the per-note network required (e.g. > CV->osc->filter->OUT) and another for any per-instrument post processing > (e.g. IN->chorus->reverb->OUT). AlsaModularSynth can do most of this (it its natively CV, but has routing limitations), SpiralSynthModular can do the rest (it has no routing limitations, but isn't natively CV). As both are jack capable you can bolt together really amazing uber synths. I'm not quite sure how either of them handle that newfangled poly-phoney that seems so popular these days ;) It is quite tricky to get right in true modular systems. The method you describe is the one I prefer, though I'm not really a big user. - Steve
Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA and Softsynths
Hi, Richard Furse hat gesagt: // Richard Furse wrote: > Just an observation about an alternative path on softsynths: a LADSPA plugin > or network can be used easily enough as a softsynth using control-voltage > (CV) approaches (a few already exist). It's just a matter of agreeing the > conventions - implementation is trivial. > > I've been meaning to finish writing PNet for a while (I've mentioned it a > few times) - essentially an environment where LADSPA plugins are strung > together to form a "patch" and are wired up to "standard" CV controls for > pitch, velocity, MIDI CC etc. I wonder, how this differs from the approach in Pure Data (Pd). The [plugin~] Pd-external can load LADSPA plugins and connects them to the rest of the signal world. I think, Alsa Modular Synth or SSM do something similar, but I didn't use those for a long time. Or do I miss the point and PNet is something to build an object file to load inside another application? A LADSPA-Meta-plugin? ciao -- Frank Barknecht _ __footils.org__
