[LAU] Open Sound Control: Is it still a thing?

[Marc Lavallée]

Le 2021-05-02 à 15 h 37, Winfried Ritsch a écrit :

> Please disagree if you can reference:
> - OSC 1.0 ist not only UPD

The liblo library and tools works with TCP (also UDP and Unix sockets): 
http://liblo.sourceforge.net/

> - OSC was not a intended to replace MIDI,
>     but to use it in multidimensional musical  parameter transmission, like the
> 3D-Postion of a violin bow....
> - OSC predecessor was ZIPI not MIDI
>
>   see https://web.archive.org/web/20070609125702/http://www.cnmat.berkeley.edu/
> ZIPI/
> (see: what next ?)

The complete CMJ article : 
https://cnmat.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/1994_the_ZIPI_music_parameter_description_language.pdf

It's a bit like MIDI, where a lot is defined; despite being a domain 
specific protocol, MIDI is often used for non-musical use cases with 
note on/off or pitch bend messages... So when possible, using OSC can 
make a lot more sense.

> BTW.: There has been an interesting paper with critics to OSC from
> Computermusic scientists:
> - https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rbd/papers/o2-web.pdf

It's true that OSC does not have Zeroconf capabilities (like the popular 
NDI protocol for sharing video streams between applications); OSCQuery 
tries to fix that (and other issues): 
https://github.com/Vidvox/OSCQueryProposal

As for OSC timestamps, it's possible to add them in the OSC messages, as 
an application specific feature, but it would add more latency. To avoid 
jitter, one possible hack would be to use lossy audio streams to 
transport control data (but it could be a bad idea).

Marc