30 Jul
2004
30 Jul
'04
7:31 a.m.
On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 12:54:47 +0200, Frank Barknecht wrote
Hallo,
Dave Robillard hat gesagt: // Dave Robillard wrote:
I would contest (as I always do) that a modular synth is not equivalent to a
node based programming language. They are different things. It's nice to be
able to group modular units together into voices that you can reuse later, but
I don't see ladspa plugins being the same as pd externals at all.
I guess what I'm saying is that it's useful, but lacking this feature in a
synth does not make it unusable.
cheers,
dave
I'm designing a modular synth engine, and
would like to get some input
on desired features/abilities to make sure it's designed in a way that
will make it the most flexible.
So, what features are important to you in a synth? What annoys you
about the current crop of linux synths?
The most important feature of a modular synth is IMO a way to build
reusable building blocks. Think functions or objects in programming
languages. You may want to take a look at how this is implemented in
Pd amd jMax. Without this a modular synth will become unusable almost
immediatly. Be prepared for users which want to create hundreds of
modules, this is not unusual at all.