Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] stereo / multichannel plugins in LADSPA ?
From: Benno Senoner (sbenno_AT_gardena.net)
Date: Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:01:00 EET
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Erik Steffl wrote:
> I guess it's no news for most but that's how OSS supports stereo.
>
> as long as you consider all input ports 'tied' (all connected to same
> source, data expected on all of them) it's OK, but if you want all ports
> act independently, it's not as simple. if you want independent
> inputs/outputs it gets complicated and you pass along more data then you
> need. worst situation: you have 24 ports but only one of them is used at
> a time (it's not same as having just one port).
Actually the non-interleaved multichannels is somehow already here:
just set up one port per channel and use all channels in an independent fashion.
But in this case too, a flexible way to handle multiple channels would come
handy (as suggested with my min,max proposal)
I think it would be nice if the plug supports my proposed interleave method,
and a one-port-per-channel method.
This method would still require the host telling the number of wanted channels
to the plugin, so that the plugin can set up the right number of ports.
Assume we want 4 channels but with 1 port per channel: (non interleaved mode)
the plugin sets up 4 input ports and 4 output ports.
if we want the interleaved mode (4 channels all interleaved),
the plugin only sets up one input port and one output port,
each carrying an 4channel interleaved stream.
>
> of course, there's nothing to prevent the API to support both (many
> ports per plugin and interleaved data streams). actually I think it's a
> good idea (now that I think of it that's probably what you've
> suggested).
Yep, these two extensions are easy to understand, and can both make use of the
min/max method.
supporting both interleaved and non-interleaved multichannel support gives you
maximum flexibility and maximum speed.
Benno.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 21:56:46 EET