On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:15:20PM -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 17:57 +0200, Alfons Adriaensen wrote: > > I can't imagine any sane interface standard for audio controls without a > > way to say that the natural way to represent a port's range is exponential. > > saying that the port range is exponential doesn't pin it down very much. > it still requires the host to make decisions about precisely what kind > of exponential curve to use for the range, and it may get it wrong.
The "type" is irrelevant, the problem is that what I generally want to say is "this goes from 0Hz to fs/2Hz, and I want it to be logarithmic", but you can't say that literally, so you have to say "this goes from fs/10000Hz to fs/2Hz", which tends to make the bottom value a bit random. I don't know what the correct solution is, possibly just providing a rule for the host to caluculate what it should use instead of log(0) is enough, but I'm not sure what the rule should be. > > The reason why it gets them wrong is probably > > because the code handling defaults is something like 10 times more > > complicated than it need be. > > care to suggest a simpler approach? LADSPA defaults are broken, and hopefully not relevant. - Steve
