8 Dec
2003
8 Dec
'03
9:18 p.m.
I would also second Fernando's encouragement to use OSC since that way
more inter-app communication will be possible, something that we really
need amidst all these diverse software packages that unfortunately often
offer very little interoperability.
Ivica Ico Bukvic, composer & multimedia sculptor
http://meowing.ccm.uc.edu/~ico
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-audio-user-bounces(a)music.columbia.edu [mailto:linux-audio-
user-bounces(a)music.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Fernando Pablo
Lopez-Lezcano
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 6:17 PM
To: A list for linux audio users
Cc: PD-list; Maarten De Boer
Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Re: tapiir
> Quoting Maarten De Boer <mdeboer(a)iua.upf.es>es>:
> > > I think espcially OSC would be *very* interesting for Tapiir,
> > > considering how easy it may become to use Linux sound apps under
Mac
OS
connecting
be
> > X in the future.
>
> I am not familiar with OSC. netsend might be easier. What kind of
input
does it
take?
Netsend and netreceive are paired objects in PD, usually used for remote machines, and capable of transporting TCP
or UDP messages.
Netsend takes
> an message of "connect hostname portnumber", which I suppose could
made a
> localhost and a port in Tapiir.
>
> I still think it would be worthwhile to use OSC, as it is a
wider-used
format,
> allowing communications with many more apps than PD. But it could
[not
sure
against
here] be a bit more work.
It would be great if the solution is not specific to Pd (nothing a Pd solution as well, of course). I can think of
other programs that
could benefit from "remote control" of presets (hint: freqtweak!).
-- Fernando