Re: [LAU] opinions from (potential) user perspectives wanted

On 2 July 2010 00:57, Gabriel M. Beddingfield <gabrbedd@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, James Morris wrote:
>
>> It's like a sequencer in that the user will be able to create rhythmic
>> patterns which lack pitch and velocity data, and almost like an
>> arpeggiator in that it will automatically generate the pitch and
>> velocity data from an algorithm - and unlike either a sequencer or
>> arpegiattor, it uses a 2d window-placement like algorithm to generate
>> pitch/velocity (mapping these to x/y).
>
> The more I think about this... the more fun it sounds.
>
> Have you considered doing an MDI interface?  This way you can go back to
> spamming windows... but it stays contained in your applications MainWindow.

No I'd not considered it. But as long as I could force the doc windows
to appear exactly where told it would work but this would probably
depend upon whichever window-manager was controlling windows. I'm not
keen.

>> 1) a basic 'timebase master' implementation which lacks tempo maps,
>> signature changes, etc, just enough to fire the app up and play around
>> with ideas (currently it does this).
>
> When you say 'timebase master' -- do you mean Jack's timebase master?  Or
> internal.

master of the timebase, for jack clients?

> I'm invisioning something very simple and flexible. Something that pretty
> much keeps 1/4 time.  Something that can also slave to the Jack transport.

If doing that prevented me as a user from using it with more
interesting time signatures than 4/4 I'd be pretty hacked off.

> However, I think if you try to make this into something that can be a
> reliable Jack transport master -- I think it would stop being fun.  :-)

Yeah, I could make it really complicated..

Cheers,
James.

>
> Peace,
> Gabriel
>
>
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Fri Jul 2 08:15:01 2010