[LAD] Monophonic synths (was: Plugin 1/oct frequency controls)

David Robillard d at drobilla.net
Fri Aug 24 18:32:43 UTC 2012

On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 20:04 +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:57:50PM -0400, David Robillard wrote:
> > Anyway, since I have failed to get an opinion out of you one way or the
> > other, and you wish to end this thread, I will assume the thing to do is
> > just fork the plugins and change their interface appropriately to be
> > more sensible outside of AMS with no regard to backwards compatibility.
> I think that is the best thing to do, and probably should have stated
> that earlier.

Fair enough, done

>  BTW, I didn't want to end the thread, but you suggested
> it was getting too long, so...

Nah, I just think it's kind of funny how much it snowballed from my
original intentions.  Ah, mailing lists :)

> > They are currently attributed entirely to you, and "fomp" is a cute
> > quasi-acronym for "Fons' Modular Plugins".  I can change this if you do
> > not wish to be associated with them whatsoever.
> They are GPL licensed IIRC, so as long as you follow the rules,
> no objections !

Sure.  Naturally I only meant in user visible ways, of course I would
never do such a thing for the copyright stuff.

Another thought on the more artistic side of things that occurred to me
last night: isn't making the computer a cheap version of an analogue
synthesizer much the same as making a synthesizer a cheap version of
other instruments?

I think the most exciting thing about computers is the unique
possibilities they bring as an instrument unto themselves.  Things like
plugins with pretty pixmap UIs designed to look exactly like some box
with knobs on it has always struck me as silly, and missing the point.
Emulation at the module level (not including UI) like in this case is
nice, because.. well, some modules (like Moog filters) have a particular
desirable sound, and the whole point of modular systems is you can hook
up whatever bits you like.  However emulation at any 'higher level', to
me, is just forcing the computer to be a cheap version of physical
instruments.  Futzing about with knobs and wires on a screen more than
you have to is just limiting.  Maybe this will become less true as
touchscreens become more pervasive, but at least from a UI perspective,
a lot of this blind emulation of physical things on a screen is terribly
unusable with a mouse.

Sonically.. I'm not sure.  I suppose anything FFT based is pretty
inherently a 'computer' sound... granular synthesis?  Those perfectly
tuned "FM" (actually phase modulation) sounds more or less require
digital precision... Perhaps this is an idea that applies more to UI,
and the sequencing side of things, than sounds, since these machines can
create pretty much any sound imaginable anyway...

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/attachments/20120824/a1eaf001/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list