[linux-audio-dev] PTAF link and comments

[Steve Harris]

On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:31:06 +0200, Sami P Perttu wrote:
> The more I'm thinking about this the more biased I am toward just one
> process() that replaces values. And an in-place-is-okay hint. No gains or
> DRY and WET controls. The host can probably reserve some host-global
> buffers for mixing, no? The cache impact wouldn't be big in that case.
> Somebody should do some actual measurements to find out.

You still need WET and DRY, even if you have mixing.

I only have a PC100 machine here, so theres no point me measuring it.

> > ...pitch...
> 
> I'm still having problems understanding why logarithmic frequency is
> better than linear. Doesn't it violate the principle of keeping plugins as
> simple as possible? Most plugins need linear frequency. How is the
> conversion done? Well, maybe there could be a control iterator that
> provides for it. Please tell me about your plan.

Linear pitch (logartihmic frequency) is just what people expect. When you
modulte the cutoff of a filter (for example) you expect it to modulate
logarithmicly.

- Steve