Nick Lanham wrote:
> Firstly, yes, at some point I would like to have kit editing/creation
> available from the GUI. This is non-trivial however, and a bit down
> the road.
>
> To your second point, I agree that it's non-optimal to have to fire up
> hydrogen to make minor changes to kits and the like. However, I still
> think DrMr improves the situation, as it sits nicely in your host,
> saves all your parameters, and doesn't require any external routing.
> Of course if you're fine with setting up all the external routing and
> kit loading etc, you should just avoid DrMr all together, hydrogen is
> more fully featured and almost certainly more stable anyway, but the
> whole point of me writing DrMr was that I got sick of having to set up
> both my host and hydrogen for every track i wanted to open.
>
> But yes, kit customization is in the pipeline, although behind getting
> the core solid and stable.
Hm, i'm sceptic about this point... This code duplication seems to be
quite an overhead. If you go into every detail of drumkit management,
you end up with re-writing a lot of hydrogen classes in plain C. Is that
really worth the effort?
Why not improve the drumkit editing abilities of hydrogen? Or create a
dedicated drumkit editor on top of hydrogen's codebase (imho, hydrogen
is not really user-friendly enough when it comes to kit-creation...) ?
- Sebastian
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Feb 14 16:15:04 2012
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Feb 14 2012 - 16:15:04 EET