18 Apr
2007
18 Apr
'07
10:30 p.m.
Hi,
I was just thinking it would be really great if someone (with
programming skills several notches higher than my own) could JACKify
Beatrix. Now, I realize that Beatrix is not GPL'd software, so it
doesn't have anywhere near the community interest that it COULD
have... <ahem>
But just for the sake of usability, if someone could post a patch
(which could also be submitted to the Beatrix author), I think there
would be quite a few delighted people, myself in particular! :-)
Any thoughts?
-TimH
19 Apr
19 Apr
4:54 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 05:30:29PM -0700, Tim Howard wrote:
Hi,
I was just thinking it would be really great if someone (with
programming skills several notches higher than my own) could JACKify
Beatrix. Now, I realize that Beatrix is not GPL'd software, so it
doesn't have anywhere near the community interest that it COULD
have... <ahem>
But just for the sake of usability, if someone could post a patch
(which could also be submitted to the Beatrix author), I think there
would be quite a few delighted people, myself in particular! :-)
Any thoughts?
Have a look in the archives. This was discussed recently.
- -ken
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGJxIWe8HF+6xeOIcRAoVTAJ9P61TOsawB+SyTAD2qa9dc46obWwCfbbT1
GoWPyr8Uc+vP2iTgb1ydDOA=
=W8AL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
4:20 p.m.
On 4/18/07, Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
I know it was discussed, but I wasn't sure if anyone was interested in
actually creating a patch. I read through the archives, but I
couldn't see any resolution...
Is the general consensus that it can't/shouldn't be done?
-TimH
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 05:30:29PM -0700, Tim Howard
wrote:
But just for
the sake of usability, if someone could post a patch
(which could also be submitted to the Beatrix author), I think there
would be quite a few delighted people, myself in particular! :-)
Any thoughts?
Have a look in the archives. This was discussed recently.
- -ken 
8:48 p.m.
This would not be a great deal of work to do, there would have to be a few
changes to register the interface and more to implement the jack callback,
but it is very do-able. I consired the possibility but decided against going
any further - this source code is not under GPL, so any changes are
basically to improve a peice of proprietary code that is under copyright
albeit that the sourcecode is available on-line.
It's a great app and a good project to work on but I think I would prefer to
continue with improvements to the bristol B3 emulation than work on any code
that is not under GPL.
The consensus will probably be to do it, then you just need a coder to get
into the work.
Regards,
Nick.
From: "Tim Howard"
<tdhoward(a)gmail.com>
Reply-To: A list for linux audio users
<linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
To: "A list for linux audio users"
<linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org>
Subject: Re: [LAU] Anyone interested in JACKifying Beatrix?
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:20:16 -0700
On 4/18/07, Ken Restivo <ken(a)restivo.org> wrote:
I know it was discussed, but I wasn't sure if anyone was interested in
actually creating a patch. I read through the archives, but I
couldn't see any resolution...
Is the general consensus that it can't/shouldn't be done?
-TimH
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 05:30:29PM -0700, Tim
Howard wrote:
But just
for the sake of usability, if someone could post a patch
(which could also be submitted to the Beatrix author), I think there
would be quite a few delighted people, myself in particular! :-)
Any thoughts?
Have a look in the archives. This was discussed recently.
- -ken 
20 Apr
20 Apr
6:12 a.m.
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Ken Restivo wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 05:30:29PM -0700, Tim Howard
wrote:
Hi,
I do have an interest in making Beatrix more suited for plug-in
environments, but it is a long road. The main issues that concern an
adaptation are (in no particular order):
* The system sample rate is more or less fixed at 22.05 KHz.
* The system buffer size is set at compile-time.
* Dynamic memory is considered not to be a problem and is not released
when free (this is not a leak - it just remains allocated but unused).
* There is no support for shutdown/unloading.
* The reverb FX hogs the cpu due to denormal numbers.
* The rotary speaker FX has a flaw for which two fixes exist: either
a huge lookup table or additional cpu cycles. Which is most
appropriate?
* There is no real user interface and for portability there is no UI
service interface.
Further, to take full advantage of plug-in environments the overdrive,
reverb and rotary effects should probably be broken out of the main chain.
This creates a conflict with the current configuration mechanism which of
course assumes that they are integrated. This is probably a secondary
issue, since as independent FX units they need their own and independent
control surfaces anyway.
-fk
Fredrik Kilander | email: fk(a)dsv.su.se
Dpt. of Computer and Systems Sciences | gsm: +46 (0)70 371 31 53
Forum 100 | land: +46 (0)8 16 16 02
S-164 40 KISTA | www: http://www.dsv.su.se/~fk
SWEDEN | skype: fredrik.kilander
Hi,
I was just thinking it would be really great if someone (with
programming skills several notches higher than my own) could JACKify
Beatrix. Now, I realize that Beatrix is not GPL'd software, so it
doesn't have anywhere near the community interest that it COULD
have... <ahem>
...
Any thoughts?
Have a look in the archives. This was discussed recently. 
7:40 a.m.
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:12:04AM +0200, Fredrik Kilander wrote:
Hi,
I do have an interest in making Beatrix more suited for plug-in
environments, but it is a long road.
Nice to see you posting here, Frederik.
If it's a matter of paying for a programmer's time,
I, for one, would vote with my wallet. I'd rather
donate something like $100 to a community supported
project, software that would incrementally improve
over years, and that would play well with other
Linux audio software.
Just as I will vote with my wallet for video cards from the
Open Graphics Project, when they become available.
--
Joel Roth
12:10 p.m.
Joel Roth wrote:
If it's a matter of paying for a programmer's time,
I don't think it is, but it might speed up the process considerably.
I, for one, would vote with my wallet.
<rant>
"VOTE & WALLET" - those words should IMHO never be mixed together!
"tipping programmers" or "donating to a project" is different.
</rant>
#robin
3:08 p.m.
On 4/20/07, Joel Roth <joelz(a)pobox.com> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 20, 2007 at 10:12:04AM +0200, Fredrik
Kilander wrote:
I second that!
Hi,
I do have an interest in making Beatrix more suited for plug-in
environments, but it is a long road.
Nice to see you posting here, Frederik. If it's a matter of paying for a programmer's
time,
I, for one, would vote with my wallet. I'd rather
donate something like $100 to a community supported
project, software that would incrementally improve
over years, and that would play well with other
Linux audio software.
I would also be more than happy to contribute to a project like this,
provided that the whole community could contribute freely and benefit
from the changes.
I'm really looking forward to seeing the next release under a GPL license!
-TimH
12:15 p.m.
Fredrik Kilander wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Ken Restivo wrote:
Hi Frederik,
nice of you to join in; that simplifies things a lot!
IMHO it's not so much the code but the license that blocks development.
If you consent to allow beatrix code to be modified (and modifications
to be distributed,...) it's really easy to give it a jack-audio port.
Your code is nicely structured and it might even make sense to rewrite
it as jack-midi & jack-audio client.
I understand your motivation, of keeping beatrix a Hammond-organ - and
not a DIY Organ kit. - maybe it makes sense to have the whole-synth-core
(incl. reverb & whirlProc) insinde a DSSI plugin..
I understand your concerns about version splitting or not receiving
feedback on redistribution - but watching the linuxaudio community for
the last years there have been no such experiences; rather the opposite:
good branches usually get merged back into the main-tree and the bad
code just vanishes..
the GPL even gives you protection against abuse. - i'd actually be
surprised if parts of tonegen.c are not hidden in some non-open-source
synths out there...
If the "compile yourself" is intended as hurdle to get people interested
and and involved.. it does not seem to work that way for un*x audio
dev&users folks.
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 05:30:29PM -0700, Tim
Howard wrote:
Hi, Hi,
I was just thinking it would be really great if someone (with
programming skills several notches higher than my own) could JACKify
Beatrix. Now, I realize that Beatrix is not GPL'd software, so it
doesn't have anywhere near the community interest that it COULD
have... <ahem>
...
Any thoughts?
Have a look in the archives. This was discussed recently. I do have an interest in making Beatrix more suited
for plug-in
environments, but it is a long road. The main issues that concern an
adaptation are (in no particular order):
* The system sample rate is more or less fixed at 22.05 KHz.
I wondered about that. There are a few obvious places that can be worked
around easily. Are the hardcoded derived parameters in the code?
* The system buffer size is set at compile-time.
is there any reason why
oscGenerateFragment(buf, nframes); preamp(), reverb() and whirlProc()
would not work with a dynamic bufsize; after
#define BUFFER_SIZE_SAMPLES some_variable.
* Dynamic memory is considered not to be a problem
and is not released
when free (this is not a leak - it just remains allocated but unused).
that'll be fixed when it's under GPL.
* There is no support for shutdown/unloading.
trivial.
* The reverb FX hogs the cpu due to denormal numbers.
if you say so.. - I don't hear it ;)
* The rotary speaker FX has a flaw for which two
fixes exist: either
a huge lookup table or additional cpu cycles. Which is most
appropriate?
if you document how to generate the lookup table: memory is cheaper than
CPU. - but then again how huge is /huge/ and how long does it take to
optimize the data structure...
* There is no real user interface and for portability
there is no UI
service interface.
Further, to take full advantage of plug-in environments the overdrive,
reverb and rotary effects should probably be broken out of the main
chain. This creates a conflict with the current configuration mechanism
which of course assumes that they are integrated. This is probably a
secondary issue, since as independent FX units they need their own and
independent control surfaces anyway.
There's for surly many details to worry about... - but it seems worth to
address and fix them..
#robin
6480
days inactive
6482
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Fredrik Kilander -
Joel Roth -
Ken Restivo -
Nick Copeland -
Robin Gareus -
Tim Howard