I stopped following where you said you want to send from one channel to another. Of course, it is cool, but what has it to do with the topic? If we can send two channels to one *channel*, this does not mean that we can send two channels to one *effect*.
> Regarding vocoder: I propose to extend the LADSPA effect plugin such that > you optionally can specify an FX channel which it fetches secondary input > data from. One could/should use existing features in the rewritten FX mixer > code (like the job queueing/data flow control). I'd also vote against > adding another core component/window (we already have too much). This does neither sound symmetric, nor generic to me. Imo another component/window would not harm. Actually, we could replace the controller rack by it: * Controllers are just a special kind of effect! The have 0 audio in and out ports, and one data out port. * Peak controllers are like Controllers, just that they have 2 input channels. Think about it: This would mean that we'd replace the controller rack with an effect rack, where you'd hopefully have an overview over all of your effects (this is currently missing imo...). Opinions? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services. Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between. Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
