Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] more on plugins/LADSPA
From: Iain Sandoe (iain_AT_sandoe.co.uk)
Date: Sat Mar 18 2000 - 08:04:26 EST
>> For example in the repatching case you mention in another post, SC unit
>> generators do have to know about this, because the calculation rate on one
>> of the inputs may have changed and the ugen may want to install a different
>> function pointer.
>
> That is, you're using a higher control rate than the plugin function
> call rate, so that control data is more like low frequency audio
> data...?
>
> If this is the case, the problem with LADSPA is that it basically
> supports only two sample rates per plugin; one for the audio data,
> and one for the control data. The control rate implicitly equals 1
> sample per run() call.
>
> Personally, I think this is way to restrictive for many things, and
> I'd like to see an API extension that allows different sample rates
> on the ports,
I agree with this... this has been worrying me for a few days...
the idea of a a control sample rate that is coupled to the run() call rate
is not helpful since the latter should be determined by issues like
efficiency and latency whilst the former is determined by the control signal
bandwidth...
Iain.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Mar 18 2000 - 15:53:26 EST