8 Apr
2004
8 Apr
'04
2:23 p.m.
Mr.Freeze wrote:
Heya,
Frank Barknecht wrote:
Well, I know almost nothing about DSP, but for sure, there is nothing to
prevent any crash. My waldorf (Q) crashed once in a week (based on
56303, as most hardware VA theses days, including nova and virus). The
thing is that generally, the system is a lot more simple on DSP based
machines, so it is simpler to 'control everything'.
But my point may be too naive !
Cheers,
David
Sukandar Kartadinata ist working on something like
this for some time
now. See http://glui.de/proj/gluiph.html for a general project
description (careful, psycedelic website!) and this PDF:
Interesting!
You could start with the PD for PDA project, which
did this, but for
Pd 0.32. We're now at Pd 0.37 on general purpose computers.
I'll definitely not go for an ARM-powered expander!
Let me explain the facts, what I should have done from the beginning:
I'm planning to build a special controller based on the Theremin, with MIDI
and/or CV outs. All material released for free: schematics, software...
The Theremin does have a trademark sound, even if most think it's a pure sine
wave; but the aforementionned controller won't reduce itself to this: I'm more
interested in its sensing technology.
Yet, I was wondering if an built-in expander was needed in addition, for live
use; or if it could simply rely on a computer (my use). Hence my idea to use a
kinda port of PureData to DSP so that the user could get the same sound either
from hardware or software means, just by dumping patches; instead of having to
write a separate pure C/C++ DSP source code with specific non-compliant
patches, or even having to advice proprietary synth expander to the prospective
users. But what I do not want to do is building myself another computer...
I thought DSP-powered expanders had one big advantage over PC-based expanders:
the lack of crashes... Trick or treat?