[linux-audio-dev] Modular synths of the world, unite and take over :-)

Lukas Degener AFBLukas at gmx.de
Tue Mar 18 14:27:01 UTC 2003


>
>
>>LADSPA: its not great for "instruments", but IMHO works at precisely
>>the correct level for synth modules.
>>
Agreed. Well, ok there are some issues, but no real problems. Actualy i 
would like arbitrary datatypes. And it would sure be nice to have more 
information on the semantics of the ports. The latter one maybe rather a 
problem of the hosts not completly implementing everything that is 
supported by ladspa (until recently, i didn't know about this rdf 
thingy, for instance.)

>>
>>however, all (or nearly all) of the tools mentioned already support
>>LADSPA and yet it doesn't seem to have done much to to reduce the
>>redundant work that is going on on these applications.
>>
Which i think is related to the above. I think we should first improve 
the hosts, so that they actualy use 105% of what is there already, 
before we start thinking about a new plugin api. And if i was to start 
with som mod. synth. project from scratch, i also would try to keep the 
amount of "native modules" as low as possible, since A) no other app can 
use them, and B) i would have
to code them myself, while there ladspa plugins exist for almost any job 
(including things like making coffee, i'm sure.
Does your microwave oven support LADSPA? :-))

On the other hand, i think it's not realy the question what api we use 
for modules. (well, a common api wouldn't hurt ;-) )
As i said, i think the real difficult problem would be defining that 
comon model. Maybe what jack does is closer to it.

>I agree with this - I program free software to try and find out how stuff
>works, that's the fun for me. If I start to get concerned with things like
>code reuse and effeciency of time used, it starts to feel like, well - being
>at work ;)
>
Lol. :-)
Well ok, you might be right, from the POV of a developer, i think this 
is exactly the point: we tend to push our own stuff because it's fun, or 
maybe selffullfillment (is this the right spelling?). We also tend to be 
not that aware of similar work beeing done somewhere else, at least 
that's my impression. Or even worse, we _are_ aware of another project, 
but hate it :-)
There is much emotional nonsense in those endless flame wars about vim 
vs emacs, kde vs gnome, etc.
And the other point you mention is true aswell. It is hard work. And it 
usualy includes compromises and all this bitter stuff :-)

But from the users point of view, things look different. Just look at 
this kde<->gnome situation. I'm seeing myself as a rather a user than a 
developer when it comes to desktop envirements, and i definitly would 
like a _realy_ integrated desktop. I don't know much about the issues 
they have there, nore do i care that much.
And if you think of it, the situation with all those modular synth apps 
is indeed similar in many aspects. We have Jack and Ladspa etc, and 
that's great, but i think it's not enough.

Sorry for long post,

Lukas




More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list