On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 04:00:01PM -0500, Dave Robillard wrote:
If anyone is seriously considering throwing Jack MIDI API out the
window, look at the LV2 event header here (just LV2_Event, ignoring the
type number mapping to URI bit):
I'm NOT proposing to throw it out, in fact my ramblings
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:13:10PM +0100, Julien Claassen wrote:
Why can't those people who discussed it here (Dave R., Fons and probably
more - simply sit down and try to take as much as possible from the API - as
it is - and try to work this new concept around it.
Well, the two you
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:13:10PM +0100, Julien Claassen wrote:
Why can't those people who discussed it here (Dave R., Fons and probably
more - simply sit down and try to take as much as possible from the API - as
it is - and try to work this new concept around
Am Freitag, 18. Januar 2008 01:28:28 schrieb Dave Robillard:
There are plenty of people using it, and the API is stable as of 0.109.0
- it's definitely not changing (again) in Jack 1. The existing one is
fine for the uses intended anyway (if you're doing massive sysex dumps,
don't use Jack)
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 14:27 +0100, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Albert Graef wrote:
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Seriously, there are three things that I profoundly dislike in MIDI.
1. The limited precision of almost all values, 7 bits or 14 with a
some of the things mentioned could be done by simply extending the
midi specification.
for example, if one needed a higher resolution for a note-on events velocity,
the event could be followed by a sysex data with one or two additional
7-bit values. (kind like it's already done with MSB and LSB
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 02:07:26PM +0100, Albert Graef wrote:
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Seriously, there are three things that I profoundly dislike in MIDI.
1. The limited precision of almost all values, 7 bits or 14 with a
kludge (but even this kludge is not available in any standard
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Seriously, there are three things that I profoundly dislike in MIDI.
1. The limited precision of almost all values, 7 bits or 14 with a
kludge (but even this kludge is not available in any standard
way for e.g. individual note frequencies).
2. Note events
Lars Luthman wrote:
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 20:24 +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
Dear Linux Audio users,
A new jack release (0.109.0) is available:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=39687
...
API changes:
* add jack_thread_wait API
* remove port_(un)lock functions
* add
Hi again!
Well Phil you said, that the new protocol wouldn't be understood by
anything. So why not first take it easy and take a look at what already
exists. OSC was mentioned here a couple of times? Might that be an idea?
And about the two APIs: why not? If you think about it thorroughly
Paul Davis wrote:
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 16:02 +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
indeed, but do you have an alternative? It's sort-of a chicken-and-egg
issue. Back when jack was conceived, there were no jack clients either.
So you didn't have anything to 'talk to' either (important exception: a
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 16:02 +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
indeed, but do you have an alternative? It's sort-of a chicken-and-egg
issue. Back when jack was conceived, there were no jack clients either.
So you didn't have anything to 'talk to' either (important exception: a
soundcard).
i
Fons Adriaensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
does it provide wrong information [..] ?
Yes, it will report clients that doesn't run anymore, in both jack
audio and jack midi.
--
Esben Stien is [EMAIL PROTECTED] s a
http://www. s tn m
irc://irc. b
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 14:38 +0100, Pieter Palmers wrote:
If someone comes up with a decent 'event protocol' I'm volunteer to
implement it in jack, alongside the current jack-midi API (as an
experimental feature). From an implementations perspective it's a
no-brainer.
But can someone
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 12:58 -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 09:37 -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote:
Is there anything inherently wrong with OSC as a _transport_ protocol?
Anything that makes it unsuitable for that purpose within the framework
of jack? (I know there have
On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 13:09 +0100, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
On Thu, Jan 17, 2008 at 11:13:10PM +0100, Julien Claassen wrote:
Why can't those people who discussed it here (Dave R., Fons and probably
more - simply sit down and try to take as much as possible from the API -
as
it is -
Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Seriously, there are three things that I profoundly dislike in MIDI.
1. The limited precision of almost all values, 7 bits or 14 with a
kludge (but even this kludge is not available in any standard
way for e.g. individual note frequencies).
Agreed. The MIDI
Paul Davis wrote:
i don't know that it matters, but this is not strictly how it happened.
JACK was developed out of Ardour's initial AudioEngine object. As a
result, when the first version of JACK was available, Ardour could
already use it. how much of an incentive or disincentive this was to
18 matches
Mail list logo
