On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> What language is the rtpMIDI written in?
>
Well, that was just provided as an example. rtpMIDI is Windows only so
probably a .NET flavor.
rtpMIDI just implements the network MIDI functionality the same as some
other projects do:
networ
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> Vesa I think you are making the live performance mode more complex then it
> needs to be.
>
His description was pretty spot on.
> all it is in FL is that its composed of samples that you press and they
> loop
>
I doubt this actually. I
I do im not denying that. I am working on getting a personal overlay (ppa
equivalent on my local laptop) for gentoo going but having issues getting
it to run cmake before the actual compile
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Vesa wrote:
> On 04/04/2014 11:23 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> > Than
On 04/04/2014 11:23 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification guess my perspective on LMMS is a bit
> different to yours in terms of whats there feature wise.
Well then you just need to use it more... :)
---
Thanks for the clarification guess my perspective on LMMS is a bit
different to yours in terms of whats there feature wise.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Vesa wrote:
> On 04/04/2014 11:09 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> > What I am trying to say is why make it a bit more complex then what is
On 04/04/2014 11:09 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> What I am trying to say is why make it a bit more complex then what is
> actually needed. I would start with something basic where we can click
> on samples and they loop and then add features as needed
What's the point? LMMS currently doesn't wor
What I am trying to say is why make it a bit more complex then what is
actually needed. I would start with something basic where we can click on
samples and they loop and then add features as needed
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:08 AM, Vesa wrote:
> On 04/04/2014 09:03 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
On 04/04/2014 09:03 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> Vesa I think you are making the live performance mode more complex
> then it needs to be. all it is in FL
I really don't care how FL does anything.
--
__
Vesa I think you are making the live performance mode more complex then it
needs to be. all it is in FL is that its composed of samples that you press
and they loop and then obviously you can create your own samples and extend
what you can do in that live performance. I like some of the other ideas
On 04/04/2014 01:26 AM, I'm Umcaruje wrote:
> Well, I've been researching into LMMS live possibilities for a while
> now. I use 2 tablets and some custom controllers to send MIDI data
> into LMMS, which I set to loop using the loop markers. (Examples:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jomHqsv8ntg,
Well, I've been researching into LMMS live possibilities for a while now. I
use 2 tablets and some custom controllers to send MIDI data into LMMS,
which I set to loop using the loop markers. (Examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jomHqsv8ntg,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPUclS-UkOE) I don't
What language is the rtpMIDI written in?
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 10:22 PM, Tres Finocchiaro <
tres.finocchi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> rtpMIDI already supports what you're describing but doesn't necessarily
> accommodate remotely controlling specific LMMS functions.
>
> What may be a more practical
rtpMIDI already supports what you're describing but doesn't necessarily
accommodate remotely controlling specific LMMS functions.
What may be a more practical request is to ask for remote control of the
DAW linked to a controller standard that's already used in the industry
because writing our own
Stian I was writing this in a half asleep state.
The pros I concur with
Computer and laptop's dont need tethering you can use wifi and or
bluetooth. ipads, and even my nexus 7 have bluetooth. If bluetooth is used
you would need to pair it with the system.
I am thinking of allowing such an app t
You seriously must have a better reason than that... Also, professional
software tends to support all kind of things.
Pros:
- Could be easier for some
- You don't need cables.
- Cool
Cons:
- Your computer or tablet must support tethering? Or else you must carry
your internet modem with you (I se
Im seeing alot of other daws going that way. Even the dj software i use has
gone that way. even FL allows you to do that too.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Stian Jørgensrud wrote:
> I know quite a few who would love to see LMMS better as live program.
> Controlling by wifi sounds more like a
I know quite a few who would love to see LMMS better as live program.
Controlling by wifi sounds more like a gimmick than useful. I mean, if you
can control LMMS with your PC, you can control it with anything with some
coding, but why...
--
View this message in context:
http://linux-multimedia-
The way things are worded it mentions app store which is mac only, plus it
seems to work with wifi only which i find to be a bit limiting. We would
need to work with upstream to get bluetooth supported.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Raine M. Ekman wrote:
> Oops, the message was totally meant
Oops, the message was totally meant for the list...
I don't think there's anything mac specific about a (I think)
text-based protocol transferred over network sockets. There are
implementations on Linux.
And of course a LMMS-specific controller from the ground up is still
totally possible w
Very valid point. BTW you only sent this to me. From what Im seeing this
seems to be very mac specific or is that not a correct assumption to make?
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Raine M. Ekman wrote:
>
> I guess that's one way to go. Why use a standard that's used by a lot of
> other (soft|ha
I was thinking of something from scratch built up from the ground up for
lmms.
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Raine M. Ekman wrote:
> Citerar Jonathan Aquilina :
> > Another thing I have noticed is that they have what they call a remote.
> It
> > connects via wifi which is a good thing imho as
Citerar Jonathan Aquilina :
> Another thing I have noticed is that they have what they call a remote. It
> connects via wifi which is a good thing imho as well as a bad one. I was
> not able to connect it to FL on mac, but again that could be a bug with the
> mac crossover wrapped version. The who
One feature that I really like with fruity loops is the live performance
mode. I think this would be a great feature to have, but I am not sure what
would be needed to implement this.
Another thing I have noticed is that they have what they call a remote. It
connects via wifi which is a good thing
23 matches
Mail list logo
