Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] soft synth as a plugin
From: Peter L Jones (peter_AT_drealm.org.uk)
Date: Fri Oct 18 2002 - 00:55:12 EEST
On Thursday 17 Oct 2002 21:49, nick wrote:
> Hi
>
> IMO running each synth in its own thread with many synths going is
> definitely _not_ the way forward. The host should definitely be the only
> process, much how VST, DXi, pro tools et. al. work.
>
> No, there is no real "instrument" or "synth" plugin API. but since my
> original post I have been brewing something up. its quite vst-like in
> some ways, but ive been wanting to make it more elegant before
> announcing it. It does, however, work, and is totally C++ based ATM. You
> just inherit the "Instrument" class and voila. (ok, so it got renamed
> along the way)
>
> Although in light of Tommi's post (mastajuuri) i have to reconsider
> working on my API. My only problem with mastajuuri is its dependance on
> QT (if im not mistaken), sorry.
>
> If people would like to my work-in-progress, i could definitely use some
> feedback ;-)
>
>
> This discussion is open!
>
>
> -Nick
Mmm, I'm a bit of a TiMidity++ fan, in case anyone's forgotten... so...
I'd want a soft-synth to track MIDI Time Codes or something on each synth
channel so it could sync to an external source, as well as being in sync with
itself internally.
I'd want to be able to generate trigger events locally - I also want to be
able to generate events remotely. I'd prefer MIDI for this (as I've just
bought a MIDI controller keyboard ;-) ).
I'd expect the system to be componentised so there would be event source plug
ins, user interface plug ins, audio sink plug ins, data (sample) source plug
ins. Plus the scheduling engine.
I think that's the basic tool set that I'd be looking for. :-)
Applications should then just be a matter of picking the plugins and gluing
them together...
(And keep the latency introduced by the engine to zero...)
Ta.
-- Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Oct 18 2002 - 01:03:40 EEST