Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] XAP: Pitch control
From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Dec 09 2002 - 19:35:39 EET
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 05:20:26PM +0100, David Olofson wrote:
> > Just to make it clear, I would have the host provide a pitch->note
> > number and note number->pitch mapping functions (for the "current
> > scale").
>
> 1. There is no "current scale". You may have different
> scales for different instruments. (As a matter of
> fact, you *do* most of the time IRL - except when
> working exclusively with synths.)
Sure, there is potentially a current scale for each note processor.
> 2. I don't like one or more function for every other
> event! There's a reason why I designed a totally
> inlined event system. :-)
I dont understand this. You still need host callbacks to implement the
note->pitch or pitch->note conversion in your conversion plugins. The only
difference is that you have the extra overhead of a (hidden) plugin.
> Anyway, still the same thing: *plugins* should be used for
> conversions between the two; not host callbacks.
I strongly disagree. Conversion plugins are a nasty hack. Especially
implicit ones.
> Oh, and here's a good reason to actually use 12.0/octave for linear
> pitch: You won't need any scale conversions at all, as long as you
> use 12tET. :-) (That's why I decided to use that in Audiality in the
> first place.)
But if you use 12.0 per octave then pitch modifying LFOs and mixers wont
work right (for a start), unless they know about the scale issues... What
happens when your not using 12 tone? Do you use eg. 5.0 per octave?
To me 1.0 per octave seems far more natural. Its what CV synthesisers
settled on after a good few years of battling, it just makes everything
simpler.
- Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Dec 09 2002 - 19:45:45 EET