Subject: promoting DSSI, was re: [linux-audio-dev] impulse convolution LADSPA plugin
From: Dave Phillips (dlphilp_AT_bright.net)
Date: Fri Nov 26 2004 - 16:03:20 EET
Stefan Turner wrote:
>I will definitely look into using DSSI, looks like it
>could be good once as supported as LADSPA is (I'd
>never even heard of it before your post, although
>that's probably just me). Is it intended as an
>eventual LADSPA replacement? I never really saw the
>need to divide plugins into 'instruments' and
>'effects', and it seems like DSSI can do both.
>
>
If I may chime in here... I urge all Linux audio developers to read the
DSSI spec, it's well-written and directly addresses some of LADSPA's
shortcomings. After working with VSTi plugins for a while I've begun to
see the need for something similar in a native Linux architecture, and I
think DSSI is an excellent way for us to get that. If you don't already
know about it, you can learn more about DSSI here:
Again, if you're a developer, check it out. Some good minds are behind
its design, and Linux audio software truly needs DSSI (or something like).
Best,
dp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Nov 26 2004 - 16:00:44 EET