22 Sep
2009
22 Sep
'09
1:51 p.m.
Sean Corbett wrote:
Btw this thread shouldn't be
another discussion about whether we need
VST or not. This thread is for people who want or need VST for
themselves or customers, and which are searching for a good solution.
Such a Hardware host might be one of them.
\r
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 8:33 AM, rosea grammostola
<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Make your dream come true, you live only once ;)
Dave Phillips wrote:
> rosea grammostola wrote:
>
>
>> Just wondering, could a hardware VST host be another solution for the
'VST-problem' on Linux?
>>
>>
>>
> Does anyone here use the Receptor box ?
>
> http://www.museresearch.com/
>
I've got an older (revision B) Receptor that I use from time to time.
It's a very solid platform... it comes with a bunch of free (beer)
plugins that sound decent, and supports plugins that use iLok-based
copy protection. But my opinion is that a) it's too closed, though on
the upside I believe the devs have given a lot of code back to Wine
... and b) a better all-open-source solution could exist, built on
netjack/lash/jack-rack/lv2rack/jconv/etc., if some kind soul(s) had
the time to put into it and bundle it all up with a nice unified
interface. An easy-to-use "Linux DSP farm OS" is a project I've
considered on occasion, but alas, real life tends to get in the way of
my grandiose dreams.
Mmh Uniwire?
http://www.museresearch.com/uniwire.php
The downside is that you still need a VST host to connect via
Uniwire... Uniwire is essentially a VST plugin that uses something
analogous to NetJack+LASH to control the Receptor (though I'm sure the
architecture is quite different under the hood). I've asked Muse on
their forums on multiple occasions to create a Jack-client version of
Uniwire, since the Uniwire VST has some issues running under Ardour.
I doubt they're terribly interested though. ;)