7 Jan
2003
7 Jan
'03
10:09 a.m.
On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 01:41:43 +0100, David Olofson wrote:
Why?
More events. I guess its not impartant now I think about it.
Yeah, byt you may not want control values to be
latched except when a
note is actually triggered (be it explicitly, or as a result of a
contro change). Also, this voice.set_voice_map() may have significant
cost, and it seems like a bad idea to have the API practically
enforce that such things are done twice for every note.
Right, but the coust is not doubled.
> So maybe VOICE creation needs to be a three-step
process.
> * Allocate voice
> * Set initial voice-controls
> * Voice on
I think this is harder to handle. It's just that there's a *big* difference
between latching control
values when starting a note and being able to "morph" while the note
is played... I think it makes a lot of sense to allow synths to do it
either way.
I'm not convinced there are many things that should be latched. I guess if
you're trying to emulate MIDI hardware, but there you can just ignore
velocity that arrives after the voice on.
I guess I have no real probelm with two stage voice initialisation. It
certainly beets having two classes of event.
- Steve