Hallo! > Yes, it would be great if some improvements got made to libxtract as a > 'side effect' of the Pd GSoC! Something that might be interesting would > be a set of MIR-inspired abstractions that use the libxtract/aubio > bindings + the Pd machine learning objects ([knn], [ann_mlp], [ann_som]) > to do common tasks - e.g. speech recognition, audio segmentation with > labelling etc. A kind of Pd MIR toolkit.
Yes that would be a nice project: first coding the vamp plugin and afterwards a set of abstraction (MIR toolkit) with some common tasks. Then these abstractions would also act as documentation so that pd-people can reproduce the way they work. And if some lower-level features are missing they could be added to libxtract or other VAMP plugins. > Thinking about it, it probably would be a good idea if the vamp host was > developed separately from the PluginHost. Particularly for the purposes > of GSoC, I think projects should stay a manageable size. > The important thing is that the two project teams (VampPlugins, > PluginHost) communicate with each other so that we retain the > possibility to merge the vamp host code into the generalised plugin host > at some later stage if it seems appropriate. Hm ... I am not sure if this is such a good idea. I guess that LADSPA/VST/... plugins are quite different to VAMP plugins, which output control data. Therefore I am not sure if it actually makes sense to combine those plugin hosts ... (of course they could have a similar syntax/interface, so that it's easy to use for users) LG Georg _______________________________________________ PD-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
