[gmpi] Re: Topic 1: Audience for and users of plugins

  • From: NoelBorthwick@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 15:54:40 -0500

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurent de Soras [Ohm Force] [mailto:laurent@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 5:16 PM
To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gmpi] Re: Topic 1: Audience for and users of plugins

> What kinds of plugins do people use today, and what will
> they want to use in the future?

>>- Generic sources/sinks (disk writers, wrapper for audio
>>and MIDI ports, etc)

This is a good point. Plugins are potentially more than data transforms.
They can be sources or sinks (aka renderers). For example a style generation
plugin might be a source.
We should eveluate this within the scope of GMPI.

>>I think everyone would agree with real-time processing support. 
>> But should we make the API capable of off-line processing (sampling rate
>>different time scale for in/out, non-linear access to source), just like
the off-line part of VST ? 
>>IMHO both keep a lot of common features but are quite different in the
>>Mixing them seems dangerous, and probably confusing for the end- user. Two
sub-APIs ? How ?

We need to be careful about classifying plugins as real time or offline. 
A plugin that is not real time due to today's cpu limitations might very
well be real time tomorrow.
Of course something that requires non-linear access to source as you point
out is a different case.
The model shouldn't dictate the host implementation as far as possible.


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: