Re: [LAD] minimal LV2

On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 11:49 AM, <fons@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:46:40AM +1000, Geoff Beasley wrote:
>
>> Hey Fons, does all this discussion mean you're thinking about
>> whipping up a few plugs then?? (please please please..)
>
> There's a number of them in more or less finished state
> and being tested here and there in the form of standalone
> Jack apps. You can see one of them (a 'Neve style' EQ, in
> standalone form) here:
> <http://www.kokkinizita.net/linuxaudio/eq1.png>.
>
> There are also two dynamics processors, and improved
> 'autotune', a reverb and some others.
>
> If I would release them, the first thing that would happen
> is that the very same people who in the past have refused to
> accept everything I'd had to say about plugins, and accused
> me of spreading FUD and being elitist etc. etc. would be the
> first one to have no moral objections at all to rip out the
> DSP code made by someone they despise, and turn these plugins
> into LV2s.
>
> Since IMNSHO the quality of these plugins resides not only in
> the DSP code but in other aspects as well, that would mean that
> a lot of my effort would just be wasted, and I'm not looking
> forward to see that happen. There is currently no LV2 host that
> even comes close to being able to accept these plugins in their
> original full-featured form.
>
> So I'm designing a dedicated framework around them, with the
> following features:
>
> - All plugins have a dedicated GUI, defined up to the last
> pixel by the plugin author. There are no 'autogenerated'
> GUIs.
>
> - The GUI parts are displayed in 'rack' form in a separate
> process. So you don't have a zillion plugin windows cluttering
> your desktop. In principle there's one such rack window per
> host, but it could be shared as well, or a host could have
> more than one. If the host's GUI toolset has the right hooks
> and is capable of providing the right information (all of it
> just raw X11 data), the host could quite easily 'embed' the rack.
> With a bit more effort it could even embed individual plugins.
>
> - The communication between the DSP plugin (running in the host
> process) and the GUI plugin (running in the rack application)
> is strictly private to these two, even if technically it passes
> via the host. A separate API gives the host access to parameters
> in a controlled way.
>
> - Multichannel support is provided by the plugins themselves.
> The host is not supposed to 'clone' a single-channel one for
> multichannel use.
>
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> FA
>
> O tu, che porte, correndo si ?
> E guerra e morte !
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-dev mailing list
> Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev

Now i'm enthusiastic again, and struggling to be patient...

Fons, a question. In the framework you've described, would it feasible
or possible to run the host and plugins as a "backend" on a headless
rig, and run the gui on the main daw box, in an attempt to offload
some of the grunt work?

Alex.

p.s. If you want a dumb 64bit user tester who's likely to try and
break this, using a big orchestral project session, call me..... :)

-- 
www.openoctave.org
midi-subscribe@email-addr-hidden
development-subscribe@email-addr-hidden
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev