> While I'm all for modularisation, the Unix philosophy and cross-
> application plugin formats, I have to say that the direct availability
> of the plugins and the common design of their windows is realy nice.
> Currently the strongest point of LMMS.
the problem is, that other plugin-formats (LADSPA, DSSI) etc. do not specif=
anything conerning the GUI or use GTK, which doesn't help much, as LMMS is=
completely written using Qt. The plugin-API actually isn't that nice at it=
seems at a first view, but currently it does everything we need and=20
developing new plugins is quite easy by just taking an existing one and=20
modify it as needed...
> I collected screenshots of all the popular sequencers. LMMS looks so
> much and I guess is structured so much like FL Studio, it could result
> in mail from a lawyer.
=46L guys already sent me a mail in which they they told me to remove the=20
graphics I really just copied from FL (which were actually only the=20
piano-keys in channel-window and piano-roll) and after discussing a while,=
>> But if you have serious problems with LMMS looking partly similiar to FL
>> Studio, please tell me, I really do not want to cause any trouble because
>> of this.
> We don't have a problem with it. We just think/feel it's a pitty that an
> obviously talented developer like you is copying images, concepts and
> (what's even worse) mistakes we made 7 years ago.
that's all ;-) they know they missed the opportunity to get on the=20
linux-market and now they have to accept, that free alternatives are coming=
> It took a while until I figured out how to add what I would call a
> instrument track (as opposed to a bb-editor track). Maybe you rely
> on drag&drop a bit much, maybe I'm just not used to this way.
per default there's an instrument-track in the song-editor as well as in th=
bb-editor, therefore you can use it as you like it... ok, the concept of=20
bb-tracks is not that obviously the first time, but after opening some=20
demo-songs and playing around with it, you'll figure this out quite fast I=
think. Beside that FL Studio uses the same concept and all users migrating =
LMMS will just feel like home ;-)
> It's most confusing to me, that there's only one bb-editor, and patterns
> are shown based on selection from the song-editor. So the same plugins
> can be reused easily, but that could be done per routing instead. Having
> a mostly empty bb-editor and having to add tracks there to use separate
> plugins is not efficient.
you mean that there should be the possibility of opening several bb-editors=
each for a bb-track and then separate instrument-tracks for each bb-track?
> Removing/Adding steps in the bb-editor is rather useless as it is now.
> I hoped every track would be stretched to allow things like 12 over 16
> steps, but the steps keep in sync, the longest track dictates the
> There needs to be a tempo and a meter track (allowing changes like
> going from 4/4 to 3/4), anyway.
for the moment I would simply add a spinbox (or something like that) where =
can specify the measure of your song. as everything will be automatable=20
later, you'll be able to automate these things as well...
> I think editing should become as similar as possible on song and
> pattern level. Patterns on the song-editor could be treated much like
> notes in a pattern. Instead of bb-editor tracks, you could have tracks
> that have a (sub-)sequencer as output. Empty patterns would trigger the
> default note, but you could use patterns with note content that would
> cause transposed and even polyphonic triggering.
took me a while to understand this, but I think I got it ;-) no bad idea at=
all, I just currently don't know how to implement this. Probably I'm going =
write a base-class for all tracks, having patterns inside. Then the=20
channelTrack-class (which is going to be renamed to instrumentTrack) is=20
derived from it as well as subSeqTrack and maybe someday some others... but=
think we should discuss this before.
> In short: MIDI Tracks could have MIDI-outs, synth-plugins or sequencers/
> patterns as output/target. No specialisation on track level, but all
> those nice options.
there's already MIDI-out-support in each instrument-track.
> The bb-editor isn't much different from the song-editor. It's mainly
> a matter of resolution. It should be tried to reduce it to that.
> That would include a velocity parameter for patterns.
you mean a global velocity-knob affecting the velocity/volume of all notes =
> Have I mentioned playing patterns from single MIDI keyboard keys, yet? ;)
I think this is realizable very easy if we have the=20
Man w=FCrde viel Almosen geben, wenn man Augen h=E4tte zu sehen, was eine
empfangende Hand f=FCr ein sch=F6nes Bild macht.
-- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Maximen und Reflexionen)