Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Sample conversion tools
From: Josh Green (jgreen_AT_users.sourceforge.net)
Date: Wed Jun 05 2002 - 11:50:07 EEST
On Wed, 2002-06-05 at 01:05, rm wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 12:43:53AM -0600, Josh Green wrote:
> > I still don't completely understand what your goal is, could you
> > elaborate more on it? Then I can get a better idea of how these two
> > projects could be complementary :)
>
> basically, i want to convert from sample cds in a few formats to wave
> files and maybe an xml file representing pertinent ancillary
> information.
>
> this data could then be used in programs/editors/etc( perhaps by using
> a library such as libInstPatch).
>
This sounds really cool actually, and I can see now what you are talking
about in relation to libInstPatch being able to use the output from your
program. I would probably have libswami interface with the output
instead of libInstPatch though, that seems to fit better with Swami's
architecture.
> > Goals for libInstPatch:
> > To be honest I'm really not interested in supporting every synthesizer
> > patch format out there. My current goals are to add DLS support
> > (SoundFonts are already fully supported and used in Swami). So in this
> > sense I can see how these two projects don't overlap in goals.
>
> my tool is complementary in the sense that it could convert file
> formats which you might not want to support (and might not be worth
> supporting) into a simple intermediary which could be easily
> supported by libInstPatch.
>
I understand now :)
> > BTW if anyone is interested in helping out with libInstPatch I could
> > really use it. Even just some help with decisions, like whether using
> > glib is a good/bad idea. Or if I should even use GObject? I'm also
> > looking for Swami developers :) Cheers!
>
> i'm probably not the most knowledgeable person to be taking
> information from, and i know i always feel abit anxious about making
> design decisions where there are multiple approaches and no clear
> winner. the remedy i think is the whole purpose of LAD.
>
> wrt GLIB, i would definitely recommend it. it's well supported, fairly
> small, and makes coding with complex data structures in C bearable.
>
I really don't want to have to deal with portability issues too much,
and Glib provides a lot of nice things in this area. So I think I'm
going to use it.
> i'm not sure about gobject (haven't made much use of it), but it seems
> it will be a safe bet. coincidently, some parts of the new gtk object
> system were prototyped in tim janik's own audio application, Beast,
> (http://beast.gtk.org/)
> (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2000-March/msg00173.html
> describes the change over and features).
>
Beast looks like a pretty nice project, I'd never heard of it till now.
I use GObject in Swami (well actually I'm just using a wrapper for
GtkObject that I ripped from the GStreamer project with some additions
of my own). I'm starting to get the hang of GObject, it seems like a
nice way to force C to be object oriented. I'm sure many are wondering
why I don't just use C++.. And they can keep wondering :) <- attempt to
avoid discussions about C vs C++.
> thanks,
> rob
>
So anyways. It would be nice to collaborate on patch file loading and
such. I think I'm going to be rather busy with other things with Swami
for a while, but I will return to other patch file formats sometime in
the near future. Cheers!
Josh Green
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jun 05 2002 - 11:47:43 EEST