5 Feb
2003
5 Feb
'03
7:08 a.m.
On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:31:06 +0200, Sami P Perttu wrote:
Linear pitch (logartihmic frequency) is just what people expect. When you
modulte the cutoff of a filter (for example) you expect it to modulate
logarithmicly.
- Steve
The more I'm thinking about this the more biased I
am toward just one
process() that replaces values. And an in-place-is-okay hint. No gains or
DRY and WET controls. The host can probably reserve some host-global
buffers for mixing, no? The cache impact wouldn't be big in that case.
Somebody should do some actual measurements to find out.
You still need WET and DRY, even if you have mixing.
I only have a PC100 machine here, so theres no point me measuring it.
...pitch...
I'm still having problems understanding why logarithmic frequency is
better than linear. Doesn't it violate the principle of keeping plugins as
simple as possible? Most plugins need linear frequency. How is the
conversion done? Well, maybe there could be a control iterator that
provides for it. Please tell me about your plan.