On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 03:49:55PM +0100, David Olofson wrote: > > Converting between continuous control and event control is not > > reliable, and kinda removes the point of cont. control. > > Yes, but without converters, you can't do things like applying audio > effects on controls...
Right, so I think its better to just ignore it. Where people want/need it they will just use audio ports (like in LADSPA). > Well, yeah - and if you can run hundreds of *those*, it probably > doesn't matter that every single synth voice spends more CPU time > processing control data than audio. :-) Well, when people start writing audio rate DSP software that isn't full of hacky optimisation and aproximations the audio rate stuff will be much slower than the control rate stuff ;) > Yes - but I'd rather not wait ten years before I can actually *use* > my software! :-) I use audio rate control software now, it just limits the amount of synthesis you can do on a modern machine from ludicrous to just excessive :) > In fact, I've already waited *more* than ten years already for PCs to > become at all usable for serious audio synthesis and recording. Now > they are, but since I didn't have Linux/lowlatency some years ago, I > never got around to write any hopelessly inefficient software that > would have been just fine today. ;-) Really? I wrote some offline sysntesis software years ago (amiga and sun4) that would run realtime now. Though theres no point porting it, it didn't sound very good :) Thats more down to my lack of ability than anything else. I bet there are people with old csound scores they can now run realtime. > > There are some hardware synths in existence today that use cont. > > control and blockless processing. The improvement in sound quality > > is noticable. > > Do they use that for *everything* (like all parameters, switches > etc), or just where it actually matters? The one I know most about has some controls that run at a reduced rate (1/4). But everything is a stream, no events and no blocks. - Steve
