RE: [linux-audio-dev] RE: Non-Sequential LADSPA Extension: experimental SDK

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: RE: [linux-audio-dev] RE: Non-Sequential LADSPA Extension: experimental SDK
From: Richard W.E. Furse (richard_AT_muse.demon.co.uk)
Date: Tue Dec 19 2000 - 22:46:44 EET


(c) - if people have better phrasing for the docs I'd be grateful. At the
moment I don't really have time to make them much simpler.

(b) - a large part of the motivation for the extensions was to allow Ardour
to include effects like fade, reverse, varispeed. Are these no longer a
priority?

I'm reluctant to include the changes if they aren't likely to be used. I'm
thinking the best option might be to forget the changes for the moment. We
can dig them out again if they're useful in the future.

--Richard

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Barton-Davis [SMTP:pbd_AT_Op.Net]
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2000 3:12 PM
To: Linux Audio Developer Mailing List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] RE: Non-Sequential LADSPA Extension:
experimental SDK

>I've had little feedback on the current form of the non-sequential
>(non-causal) extensions to LADSPA. I'm wondering if this is because
>
>(a) They're perfect ;-)
>(b) People don't find them interesting/useful.
>(c) I've made them incoherent and they aren't well understood.
>(d) Everyone's too busy with the holiday season.

In my case its about 50% (c) ("not well understood) and 50% (b)
("don't find them useful"). But thats mostly because my concerns (for
now) are with RT plugin application, and perhaps because of (c) or
perhaps because of fundamental issues, I don't see how they are
relevant in that instance.

--p


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 19 2000 - 23:41:56 EET