[LAD] automation on Linux (modular approach)

[James Morris]

On Mon, March 22, 2010 18:50, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Louigi Verona wrote:
>>
>>     Both are still limited in the sense that you have
>>     to define that data explicitly.
>>
>>     Ciao,
>>
>>     --
>>     FA
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I am sorry, I do not understand what kind of limitation you are
>> speaking about.
>>
>> I may not be a programmer and perhaps I lack knowledge and
>> understanding of some concepts like this
>> defining data explicitly, I do know that currently on Linux I cannot
>> do a whole class of things. So if I wanna
>> do an ambient tune and use Zyn as my sound source, I would not be able
>> to automate, either in real time
>> or non-real time mode in a graph some of its parameters. And I do need
>> that functionality. It can be "limited",
>> but this is all I need, since just playing notes is no good. I need to
>> work with the sound itself. This is what
>> automation is for me, it is not about mixing, it is about manipulating
>> sound itself.
>>
>> Again, maybe I am not getting something.
>>
>> Louigi.
>
> Because of movements for knobs in the timeline I can't see any
> limitations, without sample-accuracy, just the ticks should be good
> enough. Because for the values of the data 128 steps I guess for most
> sounds should be enough, but indeed because of the Hammond example,
> 14bit or 16bit would be better.
> I don't agree because of the limitation.
>
> Ralf


I'm with Louigi on this - I'd like to set up a sequence in whatever
sequencer I'm using and draw graphs to control cut-offs modulations etc
etc in some softsynth BEFORE the sound is output/recorded.

But because I can't do this, I have to settle with recording the audio of
the synth into ardour, and then use automation to control the params of
various LV2/LADSPA plugins. It has provided some interesting (to me)
results :-)


http://jwm-art.net/art/audio/qtest_fallibility.mp3

but I doubt the engineers (or real musicians) amongst you will approve.

James.