Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA proposal ...
From: Fons Adriaensen (fons.adriaensen_AT_skynet.be)
Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 19:40:03 EEST
On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 05:55:07PM +0200, Marcus Andersson wrote:
> Alfons Adriaensen wrote:
>
> >Another point. I've defended the adoption of simple integer enumerations
> >
> >(corresponding to a C switch) using the argument that it is the single
> >missing essential feature in the port information. At the Karlsruhe BOF
> >it was said that this is not true, as the LOGARITHMIC hint does not
> >specify the log base. Indeed it doesn't, nor is there any reason why
> >it should. The LOG hint means that the user would expect a widget, e.g.
> >a slider, that maps a certain displacement to a certain ratio (as opposed
> >to difference) of the controlled parameter. So the host has to do a linear
> >to exponential conversion, but it is completely irrelevant to what base
> >this calculation is done.
> >
>
> I thought the idea with the LOGARITHMIC hint was to maximize the
> controllability of the parameter and make use of the entire slider range
> better. If the base is left out, the host will have to guess, and most
> often miss the optimal slider mapping.
Sorry but this is wrong. For example, if the range is 1 to 1000, then it's
clear that 10 will be at 1/3 and 100 at 2/3 of the slider range. This does
not depend on the log base at all.
-- Fons
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri May 14 2004 - 19:34:12 EEST