Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA v1.1 Alternative Proposal
From: Lance Blisters (geoff_AT_lek.ugcs.caltech.edu)
Date: Fri May 31 2002 - 18:25:16 EEST
> I would use the defaults to give states where the plugin is active, but
> having as little effect on the audio as possbile. This gives the user a
> place to start experimenting, so they can tell the effect of the various
> ports.
A "passthrough" mode, where the filter has as little
effect as possible on the sound, is very important
for live use of filtering plugins. the user should be
able to add a filter while performing, without immediately
destroying the sound. It is much easier to tweak
settings away from the default, than to attempt to
restore passthrough on a plugin you just created.
I would encourage a policy of "default setting achieves passthrough"
rather than "default settings sound interesting".
Or at least a "passthrough" as well as a "default" preset.
Ideally the default/passthrough preset would have i.e. "depth"
set to 0 but "cutoff", "resonance" etc at values which will sound
interesting and be a good starting point for experimentation once
"depth" is increased.
GDAM uses its LADSPA xml preset system to enforce default port values
which make filters as close to passthrough as possible. All
passthrough setting for all plugins are in a single xml file for easy
distribution:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/gdam/gdam/defaults/ladspa_defaults.xml
In GDAM's implementation, LADSPA presets are named and presets
can contain settings for multiple types of filter. The idea is
that you might have a preset for "freaky bass buzz" which sets
port values on simple overdrive, multiband eq, and autowah filters in
one step. The default preset is just a preset named "default".
User-defined presets are stored in per-filter xml files.
This implementation is based on the proposed ladspa preset system
at the time.
-geoff
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri May 31 2002 - 18:18:08 EEST