Re: [linux-audio-dev] Project: modular synth editor

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Project: modular synth editor
From: Dave Robillard (drobilla_AT_connect.carleton.ca)
Date: Mon Jan 19 2004 - 01:37:16 EET


On Sat, 2004-01-17 at 05:25, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 16, 2004 at 03:32:17 -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
> > On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 14:46, Mike Rawes wrote:
> >
> > > It's when you have several connected plugins forming a single module
> > > (I'll roll out my old example of an ADSR, a few DCOs, DCA etc) that GUI
> > > generation really falls down. An alternative is that used in gAlan
> > > (http://galan.sourceforge.net), where you build up your UI and hook it
> > > up to whatever ports you like. Or PD - which lets you do ... just about
> > > anything.
> >
> > I suppose you have a point, nice UIs for a subpatch would be a nice
> > thing. Not a very complicated thing to implement in a host though,
> > especially in something like AMS which already has the ability to
> > control pretty much any parameter (right now from MIDI). Literally
> > defining in the subpatch "these things should be on the master subpatch
> > GUI" (just a big list of params) and letting the app draw them as it
> > pleases, as with current normal LADSPA plugins.
>
> There more to it than that, take a look at the nord modular UI (it has the
> best modular synth UI IMNSHO):
> http://www.clavia.com/pictures/nordmodular/patchwindowlarge.jpg
> I dont think you are going to get that quality of module layout and space
> efficiency and ease of use with automatic GUIs.

Alright, having plugin GUIs _would_ be really cool, but I (personally)
just don't feel like wasting my time talking about it because I really
don't see anything along those lines happening soon.

> > The GUI code need not be anywhere remotely close to the engine code,
> > it's not necessary to have some message-passing interface to accomplish
> > this.
>
> I keep coming back to this, but I dont think I've made the point well
> enough - the external UI control data has to be routed to the host -
> the host needs to keep a (sample accurate) log of all the control data
> that is sent to the plugin so that it can have reproducability.

Well, yes, they do need to communicate of course, I was just saying
there's no point of a message-passing interface or whatever, the code
can still be modular w/o such a system.


New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Mon Jan 19 2004 - 01:37:46 EET