On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 22:37 +0100, Bernat Arlandis i Mañó wrote: > What do you think about fixing ticket #21 for 1.09? Without this, > multi-channel output cannot be enabled from QSynth. > Excellent idea. I'm all for it. Then it would also be easy to prepare a midnam file (for the General Users soundfont for instance) for use in certain DAWs.
> Also, I've fixed the reverb and chorus effects in multichannel mode so > they're applied to every channel, instead of mixing the effects separately. This would be a powerful feature allowing for inserts directly from fluidsynth into a live mix. Would this entail a significant CPU overhead ? Even so, this could still be very effective on dual- and multi-core machines. Could LADSPA plugins be easily incorporated in the same way as the chorus and reverb effects in multichannel mode or would this require a major overhaul ? In other words, how do fluid reverb/chorus and LADSPA fit in the audio signal chain. I imagine the current signal path to resemble something like this noteon --> chorus/reverb --> --> jack output port --> Jack Rack ---> LADSPA --> ALSA ...or is this incorrect ? I don't see how the two effects ports fit into the whole scheme. LADSPA functionality in FS could be effective when using FS in live situations while for recording LADSPA could be used as inserts or sends from within the host DAW. > I'm thinking about starting the new branch and commit these changes > there so you can review them in case you consider merging them to the trunk. Yes, an official testing branch could be a nice way for testing new features before they could be merged. E _______________________________________________ fluid-dev mailing list fluid-dev@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/fluid-dev
