7 Jan
2003
7 Jan
'03
5:40 p.m.
On Tuesday 07 January 2003 20.40, robbins jacob wrote:
Yep. (I'm maintaining the web page.) I'll try to do find the post(s)
and put something together ASAP. (Oh, and I have another logo draft I
made the other day.)
Actually, they're still virtual, unless we have zero latency feedback
from the synths. (Which is not possible, unless everything is
function call based, and processing is blockless.) The sender never
knows when a VVID loses it's voice, and can't even be sure a VVID
*gets* a voice in the first place. Thus, it can't rely on anything
that has a fixed relation to physical synth voices.
//David Olofson - Programmer, Composer, Open Source Advocate
.- The Return of Audiality! --------------------------------.
| Free/Open Source Audio Engine for use in Games or Studio. |
| RT and off-line synth. Scripting. Sample accurate timing. |
`---------------------------> http://olofson.net/audiality -'
--- http://olofson.net --- http://www.reologica.se ---
I made a post a
while back defining all the XAP terminology to
date. Read it if you haven't - it is useful :)
I was hoping something of this sort existed. It would be very
helpful if you could put the list of XAP terminology on the
webpage. It would help keep everybody on the same page when
discussing.;) And it would help people to join the discussion
without spending the 10-15 hours it takes to read december's posts. VVID allocation
and voice allocation are still two different
issues. VVID is about allocating *references*, while voice
allocation is about actual voices and/or temporary voice control
storage.
I agree entirely. If each VVID=a voice then we should just call
them Voice ID's, and let the event-sender make decisions about
voice reappropriation.