[gmpi] Re: channels, resources and other stuff

  • From: Paul Davis <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 22:52:31 -0400

>On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 18:33, Paul Davis wrote:
>> >I'd like also to understand the exact goals of this API (for example if
>> >you could add, remove plugins or change connection between them while
>> >others are running).
>> 
>> i don't think that this has been defined. its really part of the
>> host-side SDK rather than the plugin API per se.
>
>Yes but the API must be designed in order to allow that in a good way,
>if we think that this is needed. That's why I consider it an API
>requirement.

i don't agree.

i've been searching for the "holy grail": being able to reconfigure
ardour's graph without ever causing a glitch in the audio stream. i
don't really know how to do it in an acceptable way. nothing about
plugin APIs would have any effect on the problem, as far as i can
see. it must be possible, since ableton live does it, and protools
claims to do it. that's why i say that this has do with the host, not
the plugin API.

(as an aside, the only model i have for doing this is to duplicate the
entire graph, modify the copy, then switch copies. this is very
heavyweight, but it does work).

>Same as above (sorry for copy and paste, but I'm too tired now to
>elaborate): Yes, but the API must be designed in order to allow that in
>a good way, if we think that this is needed. That's why I consider it an
>API requirement.
>What I mean is: if we want to allow a network plugin and sequencer
>plugin, they not only must be possible, but we probably will need some
>extra interfaces to make them work well (from the point of view of
>features and usability).I'm thinking of an implementation where those
>extra interfaces are used also for other goals.

its not clear that this is true. Waves has run a "shell" plugin to
host its own plugins for years now, using the existing plugin
APIs. Although they wanted a bit more functionality (which the latest
VST provides), it wasn't really critical, and i don't think many
people complained about it. is there anyone from waves on the GMPI list?

>> >- Will sequencer plugins be allowed (on the same graph level of the
>> >plugins it controls)? 
>> 
>> of course. did you read steve harris' summary of the types of data
>> that are proposed? "music" data is a notation for "something like MIDI".
>
>Same as above.

not the same. the current results of the requirements discussion
includes plugin that are:

         music in, music out
         music in, audio out

which covers all the sequencer plugins i can imagine. i don't see
anything else that is needed to allow sequencer plugins to function
without limitation. can you?

--p

----------------------------------------------------------------------
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. 10-2003