On 22 Jan 2007, at 22:15, Stefano D'Angelo wrote:
> 2007/1/22, Dmitry Baikov <dsbaikov@email-addr-hidden>:
>> On 1/23/07, Stefano D'Angelo <zanga.mail@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>> > Good point! This is true, but there are lots of sound processing
>> > plugins around, so maybe instead of creating a new API and then
>> apply
>> > some "compatibility layer", it should be better to create a
>> wrapping
>> > tool natively. I think it should be also easier to expand.
>>
>> Then, embrase LV2 and create LV2 plugins that will load VSTs, LADSPA
>> and anything you want.
>> Or if you want something not possible with LV2, write an extension
>> proposal.
>>
>> I think LV2 was designed as a very extendable API.
>> If it is not, in your opinion, then help the guys to improve it.
>
> That could be a very wise solution, but there's one big problem with
> it: when you load a LV2 plugin, you load only one plugin!
> To be clearer I make an example: I have 10 VST plugin, and I want to
> write a LV2 plugin which loads VST plugins. When the LV2-aware
> application asks me which plugin I want to load I should specify the
> VST plugin loader... but then? There's no way for my LV2 plugin to
> determine which VST plugin it should load.
This works fine, and was in the design brief for LV2. When asked what
effects your LV2 plugin supports, you can return a list.
> But also if this is an overcomeable problem, for each VST plugin I
> load I have to waste memory space with a new instance of the LV2 VST
> loader plugin.
No you don't. A LV2 VST loader would be a single shared object, so
the OS would only load one instance of it.
> Then, it is quite absurde from the user point of view to open a plugin
> which lets you open other plugins... it's just illogical!
It doesn't look like that to the user, they will just see a list of
plugins, some of which will be VST and some will not be. Have you
tried the DSSI VST reflector? It would work the same as that.
> Don't misunderstand me, LV2 is great, I think that it's the best
> processing architecture out there, but it's designed with a 1:1
> relationship in mind (one plugin = one effect). That's absolutely not
> an LV2 weakness, it just does its job and nothing else (as it should
> be).
You need to read the spec again.
The terminology is confused, not least in the spec documents, but a
single .lv2 "plugin" can host multiple effects with different ports
and so on.
- Steve
Received on Tue Jan 23 12:15:03 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 23 2007 - 12:15:03 EET