14 Feb
2007
14 Feb
'07
4:01 p.m.
On 2/14/07, Stefano D'Angelo <zanga.mail(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I understand that most of you don't feel the need
to have such thing,
because LADSPA support is everywhere and lots of LADSPA plugins are
good, but from my point of view there are thousands of VST plugins
around and thousands of hardware machines that use VST and that little
program I'm going to write simply can't ignore this situation.
I'm absolutely pro-LADSPA/LV2, and I particularly dislike VST license,
but it's not a reason to exclude support right now. And it is not a
reason to stop experimenting new possible solutions.
At the end freedom is choice, isn't it?
Stefano
Aren't you kind of glossing over the fact that those thousands of VST
plugins around were all written for a different OS, and therefore
"wrapping" them involves a whole mess of technical and philosophical
problems?
Personally, I'd rather see the effort go towards making LV2 a real,
workable standard with all the important features (presets, host tempo
sync, MIDI handling/processing) that some of the other standards have.