On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 18:15:24 +0100, Alfons Adriaensen wrote > So any new design will either have only 'static' built-in modules, > or define its own plugin format. I'll probably go for the second > option, and will take the resulting flames with it. LAPSPA support > will remain, of course.
One thing I wanted to do for SSM (although I've had so little time for it over the last months :( ) is at least have a completely consistent interface for plugins, whether they are LADSPA or native, the user can't tell the difference between them. At the moment SSM has a "LADSPA plugin loader-plugin" which could be hidden by the interface I think. Looking back, it would have been much better to rely on LADSPA for most of the audio tasks, but they wern't around when I started AFAIR (and I didn't expect SSM to be so popular anyway :) ). As for polyphony in SSM, I intend to at some point write a subpatch plugin that is a mini version of SSM itself with input/output ports that can encapsulate sections of the patch - each subpach will have a voice count, and will be run multiple times and mix down to their outputs. I think this is a more flexible solution for polyphony than a global approach, as a lot of control tasks need to (can only?) be done only once. Yet another thing on my wishlist is to make SSM fully scriptable, with the GUI just calling script commands. This means you can automate patch building and do all kinds of powerful stuff - *cough* PD *cough* :] cheers, dave ................................. www.pawfal.org/nebogeo
