Subject: [linux-audio-dev] Re: compiling Linux Csound (official)
From: Dave Phillips (dlphilp_AT_bright.net)
Date: ti elo 10 1999 - 10:04:22 EDT
Greetings, Michael:
Thank you for your interest in this matter. My idea was to simply
carve the existing code into smaller pieces and add a command-line flag
to indicate inclusion (something like -DLINUX_MIDI) with the build.
However, I see your point in the need for an eventual redesign of
Csound, though I'm not at all convinced it will happen any time soon.
There seems to be some invisible weight attached to "things as they
are".
> As I've said before, if this redesign is not done and done well, then Csound
> will be replaced as a de facto serious software synthesis standard by
> something else, such as an efficient implementation of SAOL, or a
> cross-platform SuperCollider, or something like Reaktor, or something not
> yet imagined. If it is done and done well, then the weight of all the great,
> working instrument definitions, scores, and orchestras will keep Csound
> alive and a contender for years if not decades to come.
Considering the enormous work required to create something which would
be as much as and more than Csound, I doubt we'll see anything replacing
it Real Soon Now, at least nothing with open sources and freely
available (amazing what money can achieve, no ?). SAOL is progressing at
a snail's pace: it may indeed be the Csound of the future, but I
probably won't be around to use it. A cross-platform Super Collider
would be nice, and apparently its author is leaning towards a Linux
implementation. But will it accomodate existing Csound orc/sco files and
its numerous amenities and support softwares ? That would create another
great burden for the porter.
> In other words, the real value in Csound is what has been written in the
> Csound languages, not the C code that implements those languages.
I agree, but I also think Csound is something of an unsearched treasure
chest for DSP code and other interesting sources. So, in point of fact,
I think it does indeed have great intrinsic value.
> I've followed Quasimodo, but I'm Windows based while it is Linux based, and
> I haven't yet and may never take the time to see if I could adapt it as a
> newer cross-platform implementation of the Csound languages.
Q has the immediate distinction of compatibility with existing Csound
opcodes and orc/sco files. I don't know of any other software doing
that, and Paul may indeed supply the engine to realize what you've
suggested. I have no idea what it would require for Q to be implemented
in Windows, though I can't imagine it would be any trivial effort.
Abstracting the synthesis/DSP engines from the interface seems to be a
hot topic and practice these days (Quasimodo and aRts come to mind), as
your own excellent posts have indicated. But I agree with you that the
eventually accepted engines will have to make serious efforts to ensure
compatibility with the existing Csound codebase. At this time I have no
idea how that could be accomplished to the satisfaction of every one and
their chosen platform.
Well, we live in exciting times, yes ?
== Dave Phillips
http://www.bright.net/~dlphilp/index.html
http://sunsite.univie.ac.at/Linux-soundapp/linux_soundapps.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : pe maalis 10 2000 - 07:25:52 EST