Hi Audun,
Thank you for answering.
The idea is to provide the JSM with a patch and synth (and other
metadata) database,
and a mechanism for sequencers to connect to and query the database. So
patch selection
will happen in the sequencer in the classical sense:
I think that contradicts to
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 12:55 +0100, Dennis Schulmeister wrote:
The idea is to provide the JSM with a patch and synth (and other
metadata) database,
and a mechanism for sequencers to connect to and query the database. So
patch selection
will happen in the sequencer in the classical sense:
Hi!
Audun Halland and I have been thinking about a set of related problems.
The first result is the following proposal, meant to gather feedback
from the community.
I'm posting about this to both LAD and LAU, but separately. Hopefully we
can keep it technical here and have the user POV on LAU :)
On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 19:16 +0100, Dennis Schulmeister wrote:
Just a litte question to better understand your idea. How would a
sequencer request a certain patch on a certain channel on a certain
port?
I think the patch selection would be more part of the JSM than the
sequencer, but the
The minimum the abstraction layer would do, is automatic switching
between profiles. One per environment. This way you would not have to
adapt everything on each iteration of working on a project in turns.
So the idea is to decouple patch selection from the sequencers. A
sequencer would just
