On Sat, 30 Apr 2016 20:30:44 +0200
Christopher Arndt <chris@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> Because patches are more than the parameter data, or at least they
> should be, IMHO. The metadata, apart from the bank, slot, name and
> category should contain author, creation and modification time,
> arbitrary tags and usage info (e.g. which controllers do what).
Hmmm.. not sure if that info is relevant. This said, looking at a real
world case, u-he, if someone make a patch set, then he can organise it
in the file system such as:
Hollow Padsheaven 3
Bells & Ambients
Soft & Warm
Plucked
Sweeps
Leads & Dark
Rythmic
> Also, the file system only has a hierarchical structure, one dimension
> to categorize patches. There's no technical reason why a patch
> shouldn't have (be in) several categories and be listed in both, or
> why a patch browser shouldn't support "virtual" banks with "links" to
> your favorite sounds from different banks, categories, authors and so
> forth.
Yes, this is the "tags" notion that can be found for instance in
Bitwig. That"s something else, and not sure, IMHO, if it os that much
useful. I certainly do not use it yet. When I do something, I put the
tag "mystuff" and that"s it, which can be translated to a filesystem
easily.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Sun May 1 04:15:02 2016
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun May 01 2016 - 04:15:02 EEST