[gmpi] Re: Topic 7.1: Channel Formats
- From: Steve Harris <S.W.Harris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: gmpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 05:14:28 +0100
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 08:14:28 -0400, Michael Gogins wrote:
> I think it is essential that the graph include its edges, that nodes be
> orthogonal (any node can connect to any other node), and that data on the
That I have no argument with, its just the source and sink had different
semnatics in the XAP discussions.
> arcs be typeable. Before, I suggested SDIF format for the buffers
> transferred on the arcs of the graph. I do not recall any discussion of this
> suggestion, although the SDIF designers considered and solved many of the
> issues that we are facing, and it it is already a sort of a standard in the
> academic computer music world. I also suggested that if SDIF is not
> sufficient for GMPI needs, it be extended, not replaced.
SDIF is simply not appropriate, and it does not address realtime needs.
> I know from my own work and my own ears that in a complex graph, double
> sounds different from float. That's a necessary, and a sufficient, reason to
> permit, if not mandate, doubles for sample buffers.
The only example you've given of this is csound, and as has been pointed
out csound is an all or nothing situation; it only has one sample format
and it's used throughout. That is a completly different situation.
- 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:
