Gee, and all I do to 'render' a Rosegarden production is start jack_capture 
enslaved to JACK transport in a terminal, then click Play in Rosegarden... 
Doesn't bother me that it's playing in real time.

But then I only do this for fun.

On July 24, 2019 9:51:54 PM HST, Lorenzo Sutton <> 
>Well... I have to resurrect this and be warned, as often with my posts,
>it is long :)
>TL;DR: jack midi is not that easy nor optimal, so maybe re-prioritize 
>LV2 with audio render of projects
>After a few months of experimenting and discussing, I have come to the 
>conclusion that I will have to contradict myself (or at least put some 
>doubt) about this one.
>I updaeted the feature requests but will add some thoughts on here. And
>this is knowing that both are huge undertakes...
>So I had the impression (and still believe, at least conceptually),
>jack midi + jack freewheel would be the right way to go following a 
>'unix philosophy'. Now, it turns out that technically jack midi doen't 
>automatically mean that you get jack freewheel ('farster than
>e.g. for export. And I tested this in various ways the most outstanding
>was by trying to use this to 'rended' from Ardour using midi and 
>conencting it to a jack-midi application... Everything miserably failed
>and that's because (if I understood correctly the explanation I got in 
>the Ardour IRC), jack freeheel while is bound to at the same bound but 
>not checking constraints such as disk I/O.
>This would explain e.g. how other projects are dealing with it... For 
>instance this discussion on the Qtractor mailing list seems to more or 
>less support my point:
>Now, back to LV2.
>True: one can fire up (say) Carla and connect to it with alsa midi and 
>then record the result to audio, but as discussed many times this is 
>very cumbersome and time consuming, and whatever the technical solution
>I still strongly believe that having to do by hand something that a 
>computer can conceptually do 'easily' sounds quite insane.
>And let's face it, DSSI and LADSPA are dying formats, with very few 
>people still making or even maintaining plugins (as well as
>LV2 on the other hand seems to be quite active and now has a fairly
>ecosystem of plugin developers and users, opening up a nice palette of 
>sound for rosegarden users.
>I write this lengthy stuff because I _really_ (really!) like Rosegarden
>and wouldn't like to see it slowly die, so maybe having LV2 and audio 
>render would bring (back) users and interest, which I think is always 
>good for FLOSS under many aspects.
>On 24/02/19 09:22, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
>> Ted,
>> Gotcha... And I personally agree that #471 is higher priority than 
>> #462... :)
>> But I understand it's not something simple.
>> Lorenzo.
>> On 24/02/2019 03:28, Ted Felix wrote:
>>> On 2/23/19 2:27 PM, Lorenzo Sutton wrote:
>>>> So the the question is: would it be time to think about jack-midi 
>>>> support in Rosegarden?
>>>    It's been time to think about that for years.  Just no one has
>>> to actually think about it.  See feature request #471.
>>>> But... maybe an upgrade to jack-midi would help making Rosegarden 
>>>> easier to interconnect and use more of the available hosts, synths
>>>    So prioritize feature request #471 above #462.
>>>    That's helpful info.
>>>    I wish I had time to undertake these projects.  If no one else 
>>> does, I might get to them in the next decade or two.  Maybe by 2040?
>>> They are on my todo list.
>>> Ted.

David W. Jones
authenticity, honesty, community

Sent from my Android device with F/LOSS K-9 Mail.

Rosegarden-user mailing list - use the link below to unsubscribe

Reply via email to