[gmpi] Re: Requirements

  • From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:48:01 +0000

On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 04:39:14 +0100, Laurent de Soras [Ohm Force] wrote:
> Urs Heckmann wrote:
> > 
> > Why bother with normalized parameters then?
> Because it's the most convenient way to represent a
> parameter as a knob position (or as Y-axis for a curve).
> For user, it's the mapping giving the maximum and most
> regular resolution, where a parameter change actually
> makes audible change.

For things where a [0,1] range is desirable, its perfectly legitate to
express that as the range, however there are many units (time, frequency,
pitch etc.) which are better not represented in a globally contrained

For example, if you have a tempo extracting plugin (beatmatcher) you would
like to be able to connect its "BPM" output to (say) a delay plugin's "BPM"
input and have them sync. This becomes a non-trivial problem if you
enforce globally normalised ranges.
> Steve Harris wrote:
> >
> > I dont think custom is needed.
> I do. Every Ohm Force parameter curves are finetuned
> depending on the application of the control; it makes
> huge usability improvment in some cases.

In that case I would say the DSP code should wrap the parameter warping.
This is what I do.

- Steve

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: