[linux-audio-dev] Re: PdDSP?

[Cournapeau David]

Mr.Freeze wrote:

>Heya,
>
>Frank Barknecht wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Sukandar Kartadinata ist working on something like this for some time
>>now. See http://glui.de/proj/gluiph.html for a general project
>>description (careful, psycedelic website!) and this PDF:
>>    
>>
>
>Interesting!
>
>  
>
>>You could start with the PD for PDA project, which did this, but for
>>Pd 0.32. We're now at Pd 0.37 on general purpose computers. 
>>    
>>
>
>I'll definitely not go for an ARM-powered expander!
>
>Let me explain the facts, what I should have done from the beginning: 
>
>I'm planning to build a special controller based on the Theremin, with MIDI 
>and/or CV outs. All material released for free: schematics, software... 
>
>The Theremin does have a trademark sound, even if most think it's a pure sine 
>wave; but the aforementionned controller won't reduce itself to this: I'm more 
>interested in its sensing technology.
>
>Yet, I was wondering if an built-in expander was needed in addition, for live 
>use; or if it could simply rely on a computer (my use). Hence my idea to use a 
>kinda port of PureData to DSP so that the user could get the same sound either 
>from hardware or software means, just by dumping patches; instead of having to 
>write a separate pure C/C++ DSP source code with specific non-compliant 
>patches, or even having to advice proprietary synth expander to the prospective 
>users. But what I do not want to do is building myself another computer...
>
>I thought DSP-powered expanders had one big advantage over PC-based expanders: 
>the lack of crashes... Trick or treat?
>
>
>  
>
Well, I know almost nothing about DSP, but for sure, there is nothing to 
prevent any crash. My waldorf (Q) crashed once in a week (based on 
56303, as most hardware VA theses days, including nova and virus). The 
thing is that generally, the system is a lot more simple on DSP based 
machines, so it is simpler to 'control everything'.

But my point may be too naive !

Cheers,

David