9 Jun
2004
9 Jun
'04
5:37 p.m.
On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 11:04, Pelle Nilsson wrote:
Marek Peteraj <marpet(a)naex.sk> writes:
Well, no. As hosts only provide a slider for each parameter, there is
absolutely no layout, controls aren't organised in a logical way. No
visual clues - except a slider. All the parameters in all existing
ladspa plugins can be (and usually are) fundamentally different, but
you're only providing - a slider.(or a knob?) So you end up with 3x100.
Look at the tape delay ladspa plugin for instance.
Compare it to this for example:
http://www.kvr-vst.com/i/b/asiofxproc.jpg
Also, current ladspas are way to simple, so in order to achieve some
more complex dsp schemes you need to put lots of ladspas in say one
mixer strip. The order makes a difference, but there's no easy and
obvious way to reorder them.
http://www.beatmode.com/ohm-boyz/art/classic.jpg
That tiny green glowing button (LPF) is exactly one ladspa plugin these
days.
Looking at the number of i/os is horrible. 1/1, 2/1 1/2 1/3 etc etc.
Is that even close to usable?
Marek
...
Second thing is that the way you percieve them shouldn't change as you
switch applications. Which is what VST perfectly fulfills - it provides
its own UI.
If I have 100 LADSPA plug-ins installed and 3 LADSPA hosts, I'd rather
spend my time learning the guis of the 3 host-applications than
learning the different guis of 100 plug-ins. That a plug-in then has
three different interfaces depending on in which application I use it
isn't a problem. 
