[LAU] [LAD] Descent synth as dssi
versuchsanstalt at gmx.de
Tue Mar 9 13:04:26 EST 2010
Am 06.03.2010 um 07:19 schrieb Ken Restivo <ken at restivo.org>:
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 10:16:51AM -0600, Josh Lawrence wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 4:43 AM, Gerald Mwangi
>> <gerald.mwangi at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Hi, does anyone know a synth powerfull like zynadd, phasex or
>>> bristol,but in dssi format? I need something I can load into
>>> since I dont want 10 Standalones running, until ardour, rg and the
>>> synths support LASH, if that ever happens.
>> I have no idea why, but I have a warm, fuzzy soft place in my heart
>> for DSSI plugins. they always seem to just work. whysynth has
>> already been mentioned, but be sure to check out the calf monosynth,
>> which can be run as a DSSI plugin:
>> jack-dssi-host calf.so:Monosynth
>> check out the DSSI home page too, for a lot of other options.
>> I'm hoping this thread will reveal some that I don't know about! we
>> really need something like specimen in DSSI format.
>>> I think LASH should be integrated into Jack, to make it mandatory
>>> linux audio apps. The missing LASH support is one of the main issues
>>> disturbing me, when working with linux audio. Now I've said it, ha.
>>> I'm thinking of having Jack require a Load/Save callback, prior to
>>> activating the client. How feasible is that?
>> why oh why oh why did you throw this paragraph in? now no one wants
>> to talk about DSSI anymore... :(
> +1 for Calf Monosynth and WhySynth. They, in addition to AMS and
> PHASEX, are the synths I've used most.
> Zyn is kind of old and doesn't do RT; the new thing is Yoshimi, and
> I dunno if it supports LASH or ladish, but I'd guess both.
> For the record, I *HATE* session management and I don't run LASH at
> all when I can avoid it (IIRC, there's some synth that I use or used
> which requires LASH, so I occasionally have to start it up).
> I generally can't stand technologies that try to be "smart" and do
> things I don't explicitly instruct them to do. Frustrates the hell
> out of me.
> FWIW, I am also the kind of guy who turns off autocomplete and
> spelling checkers whenever I can.
How would you share a complicated production setup, aka session, with
other users? Script, or text explanation? Screenshot? Ardour audio
I'd love to have a rather bullet proof way to make my sessions
available to non-geek collaborators really fast and easy. And vice
Software trying to outsmart the user can be painful. On the other
hand, there are users out there waiting to hop on the linux audio boat
as soon as there is an obvious way to save and restore complex setups
without scripting. I'd love to make music with them.
It's good that you are happy with your way of using your DAW and so am
I. But it makes me a little sad sometimes that for remote
collaborators the learning curve is so steep.
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
More information about the Linux-audio-user