Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Specs ?
From: Paul Davis (pbd_AT_op.net)
Date: Mon May 13 2002 - 06:55:44 EEST
>No, audio port is meant solely for audio only. One of the things: you
>cannot supply a hint on the data you pass as audio stream. What about a
>host that doesn't know a plugin's audio stream is supposed to be
>parameter:sample control? This is one of the things I've thought over,
>but passing data in audio stream violates ladspa design principles (if I
>perceive them correctly).
It does not.
You've apparently never used an analog modular synthesizer :) Some of
the coolest sounds can be generated by patching an analog audio signal
into one of the control jacks. Its all just analog voltage levels, so
who cares?
LADSPA is the same. If the plugin declares a port to accept audio, it
can use the input in any way it wants. How do you think a good
externally modulated ring modulator would work, anyway? It *requires*
an input audio signal, but the signal is used to modulate the
output. Is that parameter control? Or something else? LADSPA doesn't
care.
>Again, mind you that arrays need not be envelopes. Arrays can be used to
>generalize any multidimensional data.
I don't think you've made a case for their use yet. We know that
certain kinds of plugins need multiple values to control some kind of
parameters. We know that the current way of declaring control ports
doesn't make it clear that they are all connected to the same
fundamental parameter, which means that any automatically-built,
host-suppled UI will be misleading and perhaps even unusable. But your
suggestion doesn't seem to me to address that, and doesn't provide
anything more than the ability we have now to declare a bunch of
control ports, and use them inside the plugin in some "unorthodox" way.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon May 13 2002 - 06:51:04 EEST