Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] Is ladspa actually la-dsp-a? Is JACK the ultimate solution?
From: Marek Peteraj (marpet_AT_naex.sk)
Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 00:35:38 EEST
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:04, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
> Marek Peteraj <marpet_AT_naex.sk> writes:
>
> > ...
> > Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
> > switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
> > its own UI.
>
> If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
> spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
> learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
> three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
> isn't a problem.
Well, no. As hosts only provide a slider for each parameter, there is
absolutely no layout, controls aren't organised in a logical way. No
visual clues - except a slider. All the parameters in all existing
ladspa plugins can be (and usually are) fundamentally different, but
you're only providing - a slider.(or a knob?) So you end up with 3x100.
Look at the tape delay ladspa plugin for instance.
Compare it to this for example:
http://www.kvr-vst.com/i/b/asiofxproc.jpg
Also, current ladspas are way to simple, so in order to achieve some
more complex dsp schemes you need to put lots of ladspas in say one
mixer strip. The order makes a difference, but there's no easy and
obvious way to reorder them.
http://www.beatmode.com/ohm-boyz/art/classic.jpg
That tiny green glowing button (LPF) is exactly one ladspa plugin these
days.
Looking at the number of i/os is horrible. 1/1, 2/1 1/2 1/3 etc etc.
Is that even close to usable?
Marek
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jun 09 2004 - 22:21:16 EEST
