Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] XAP status : incomplete draft
From: Nathaniel Virgo (nathaniel.virgo_AT_ntlworld.com)
Date: Fri Dec 13 2002 - 21:41:53 EET
On Friday 13 December 2002 7:05 pm, David Olofson wrote:
> On Friday 13 December 2002 19.01, Steve Harris wrote:
> > But it duplicates pitch. If you dont allow note_pitch then you dont
> > miss out on anything, all the plugins that would be possible still
> > are, it just makes a small number of specialised actions *slightly*
> > harder.
>
> Well, if it's ok to just *guess* which plugins expect you to
> interpret their pitch inputs and/or outputs as (1/12)/note rather
> than 1.0/octave, then fine - that factor 12.0 is all the complexity
> there is to it.
...but what's been said recently about note_pitch and scales means that you
have to just "guess" what scale you're in anyway. Solution: have a hint on
the input that says it's expecting (1/12)/note. That way it does make sense
to cast between them. Simple.
> Is it obvious that you must put any "traditional theory based"
> plugins *before* the scale converter, if you're not doing 12tET?
It is to me. I think you have to understand that anyway in the other system.
At least in this case only the people who actually want to use scale
converters have to understand them.
> > I haven't seen any convincing argument that it isn't redundant and
> > likly to cause problems.
>
> If the ability for the host to perform basic sanity checking on
> connections is completely irrelevant, then this feature is indeed
> redundant.
The note_pitch thing isn't just about sanity checks, though, it's a
completely different representation of the same thing.
> I haven't seen any proof that it will cause problems, though.
You can't prove a negative. I think that it's possible for it to cause quite
big problems, which is why I'm still harping on about it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Dec 13 2002 - 21:43:54 EET