[gmpi] Re: GMPI reqs draft 1 (part 2) for review, paragraph 4.10

  • From: Tim Hockin <thockin@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 15:08:45 -0800

On Sat, Jan 01, 2005 at 11:15:02AM +1300, Jeff McClintock wrote:
> We all agree GMPI parameter change events need:
> 1 - a timestamp (sample-accurate)
> 2 - the new parameter value
> 
> ...I'm saying we need an additional hint..
> 3 - rate (slope) at which to change the parameter value.

This is more or less what a we have described as ramped events.

> I am not talking about the ramps provided by many sequencers to morph a 
> parameter value over say 8 bars.

How is it any different, other than in scale?

> Yep, that's an entirely reasonable alternative.  Though not very 
> efficient to send a knob's output continuously.  Most of the time knobs 
> don't move.

Agreed completely - horribly inneficient.  We could do it is an event that
indicates the start/end of new data, so that idle knobs don't generate
useless noise.  This is still reqs, so we need to make sure these things
are possible, but not decided.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Generalized Music Plugin Interface (GMPI) public discussion list
Participation in this list is contingent upon your abiding by the
following rules:  Please stay on topic.  You are responsible for your own
words.  Please respect your fellow subscribers.  Please do not
redistribute anyone else's words without their permission.

Archive: //www.freelists.org/archives/gmpi
Email gmpi-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx w/ subject "unsubscribe" to unsubscribe

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. gmpi
  3. Archive
  4. 12-2004