18 Aug
2003
18 Aug
'03
4:38 p.m.
I have a
couple of algorithms I would like to turn
into a softsynth.
I want the synth to be alsaseq->synth->jack .
And I want it to have a couple of GUI knobs.
...
I would really like to escape dealing with basic
functionality
which has been implemented tens of times in the existing
softsynths, but want to concentrate on the algorithms themselves.
Well, why not extend some of the existing softsynths? That's what I
do: Because I'm too lazy to write gui code I write Pd externals. The
GUI part can be quickly done inside Pd (and every other user could do
their own). jMax or SSM also come to mind
and of course it is also
possible to directly write a LADSPA plugin and load that in one of
.those softsynths.
Does LADSPA support alsaseq MIDI input?
nikodimka
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
18 Aug
18 Aug
6:44 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] softsynth SDK
Hi,
They can, the softsynths that are internal to MusE work that way.
/Robert
and of course
it is also
possible to directly write a LADSPA plugin and load that in one of
.those softsynths.
Does LADSPA support alsaseq MIDI input?
7:39 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] softsynth SDK
Heh :) two different answers :)
--- Robert Jonsson <robert.jonsson(a)dataductus.se> wrote:
They can, the softsynths that are internal to MusE work that way.
/Robert
and
and of course it is also
possible to directly write a LADSPA plugin and load that in one of
.those softsynths.
Does LADSPA support alsaseq MIDI input? From: Steve Harris (S.W.Harris_AT_ecs.soton.ac.uk)
So what do you guys think?
Does LAD community need an SDK for rapid development of
out of process, aseq-to-jack, (plus ladcca ?) synths?
Or are there some reasons why this idea is inpractical?
nikodimka
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
Does LADSPA support alsaseq MIDI input?
No, each LADSPA plugin could only be one voice, youd have to write a
wrapper to hand voice allocation and MIDI handling.
- Steve
8:44 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] softsynth SDK
måndag 18 augusti 2003 23:26 skrev nikodimka:
I can't remember the beginning of this thread, though gut feeling is that
there are already quite a few projects in this vein.
If you truly want to do rapid synth development you should construct synths in
Pd or Max, or even one of the modular synths, e.g. galan, ssm, ams + probably
several others, Supercollider comes to mind since it was recently mentioned
here.
But, if you don't find what you "need" in the current flora of projects, you
are welcome to try, it's your own free time :)
/Robert
Heh :) two different answers :)
:)
Well, I guess they are the same but from two different angles.
MusE's softsynths could be discribed as the wrapper Steve mentions.
>
> They can, the softsynths that are internal to MusE work that way.
>
..
No, each LADSPA plugin could only be one voice, youd have to write a
wrapper to hand voice allocation and MIDI handling.
- Steve
So what do you guys think?
Does LAD community need an SDK for rapid development of
out of process, aseq-to-jack, (plus ladcca ?) synths?
Or are there some reasons why this idea is inpractical? 
6:54 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] softsynth SDK
On Mon, Aug 18, 2003 at 05:53:29AM -0700, nikodimka wrote:
No, each LADSPA plugin could only be one voice, youd have to write a
wrapper to hand voice allocation and MIDI handling.
- Steve
and of course
it is also
possible to directly write a LADSPA plugin and load that in one of
.those softsynths.
Does LADSPA support alsaseq MIDI input? 
19 Aug
19 Aug
6:20 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-dev] softsynth SDK
Hallo,
nikodimka hat gesagt: // nikodimka wrote:
I don't quite see why you want or what you mean with "a single
executable". For example Pd is a single executable. It only loads and
runs the objects one uses in a certain patch. If the small Tk GUI of
Pd really is too much for a machine then it is possible to run without
it.
For a compiled language SFront might be used, where in the end the
synth description is actually compiled with a C compiler into a synth.
ciao
--
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__
Well, why not
extend some of the existing softsynths? That's what I
do: Because I'm too lazy to write gui code I write Pd externals. The
GUI part can be quickly done inside Pd (and every other user could do
their own). jMax or SSM also come to mind
Its only a half of solution.
Can I "compile" or "render" the resulting engine into single
executable?
I feel pretty uncomfortable when instead of using a small
self-contained synth I have to load its guts into editing
environment.
7563
days inactive
7564
days old
linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Frank Barknecht -
nikodimka -
Robert Jonsson -
Steve Harris