9 Dec
2002
9 Dec
'02
12:02 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 03:49:55PM +0100, David Olofson wrote:
Right, so I think its better to just ignore it. Where people want/need it
they will just use audio ports (like in LADSPA).
The one I know most about has some controls that run at a reduced rate
(1/4). But everything is a stream, no events and no blocks.
- Steve
Converting
between continuous control and event control is not
reliable, and kinda removes the point of cont. control.
Yes, but without converters, you can't do things like applying audio
effects on controls... Well, yeah - and if you can run hundreds of *those*,
it probably
doesn't matter that every single synth voice spends more CPU time
processing control data than audio. :-)
Well, when people start writing audio rate DSP software that isn't full of
hacky optimisation and aproximations the audio rate stuff will be much
slower than the control rate stuff ;)
Yes - but I'd rather not wait ten years before I
can actually *use*
my software! :-)
I use audio rate control software now, it just limits the amount of
synthesis you can do on a modern machine from ludicrous to just excessive
:)
In fact, I've already waited *more* than ten years
already for PCs to
become at all usable for serious audio synthesis and recording. Now
they are, but since I didn't have Linux/lowlatency some years ago, I
never got around to write any hopelessly inefficient software that
would have been just fine today. ;-)
Really? I wrote some offline sysntesis software years ago (amiga and sun4)
that would run realtime now. Though theres no point porting it, it didn't
sound very good :) Thats more down to my lack of ability than anything
else. I bet there are people with old csound scores they can now run
realtime.
There are some
hardware synths in existence today that use cont.
control and blockless processing. The improvement in sound quality
is noticable.
Do they use that for *everything* (like all parameters, switches
etc), or just where it actually matters?