Re: [linux-audio-dev] [ardour] custom graphics + MIDI control for LADSPA plugins

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

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] [ardour] custom graphics + MIDI control for LADSPA plugins
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Thu Nov 23 2000 - 17:37:35 EET


>I've thought of using the ALSA API directly at least for figuring out
>HW capabilities. But on the other hand, this makes the virtual
>studio model completely dependen t of ALSA without having a way to
>easily exchange the audio backend API (ALSA in this case).

two comments:

    1) at some point, you have to *commit*. despite all my criticism
       of some of the bumps in the road of ALSA development, i really
       don't have any problem committing to ALSA. if all you want
       is a simplistic, naive audio API, then OSS will work for you,
       and ALSA will support that. but if you want more, why not
       commit to ALSA ? you can waste a lot of time endlessly
       building meta-API's to handle the theoretical day when
       ALSA is replaced.

    2) in my experience of writing linux audio s/w, the abstractions
       required by a lot of audio apps can be embodied very easily
       in a simple API. ardour's ALSA::MultiChannelDevice is an
       example of one such API - its not perfect or comprehensive,
       but it for low latency mmap-using applications, its pretty
       good. It would not be hard to make a more generic one that
       could satisfy almost all applications. This doesn't mean, BTW,
       that I think that ALSA is overly complex - it contains
       capabilities that a few programs need some of the time,
       and thats great. And in fact, the basic ALSA API "template":

          snd_pcm_{open,params,prepare,[read,write....],close}

       is also very simple.

       A notable exception is when dealing with odd audio formats, and
       facing the whole question of whether to convert them first or
       relying on the h/w or device driver to take care of it. I
       believe that ALSA (alsa-lib) 0.6.0's "plugin" model combined
       with the new 0.6.0 config files can solve this problem very
       easily without creating more application complexity.

>That way the virtual studio API could even run under OSS,
>(and any other audio API)

As detailed by me the other day, "the virtual studio API" cannot use
OSS with pro audio cards. Why waste time on this ?

--p


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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Nov 23 2000 - 18:21:04 EET