We could ask people from ALSA Modular Synth and Ingen to help us out.

On 16 Jan 2014 08:49, "Jonathan Aquilina" <eagles051387@gmail.com> wrote:
I think its a good idea, but again with out the SDK this cannot be made a
reality. I would file a feature request for this idea as well as for an SDK

On Thursday 16 January 2014 09:09:47 Vesa wrote:
> On 01/15/2014 11:58 PM, Israel wrote:
> > Yes please!!
> >
> > On 01/15/2014 09:12 AM, Jonathan Aquilina wrote:
> >> Hey all
> >>
> >> Can you guys please share your thoughts on this
>
> Ok, this might be a bit "far out", but hear me out. I have this idea
> that I've been thinking about a lot, for quite a while.
>
> The idea is: a declarative interpreted modular synthesis plugin
> framework (DIMSPF for short).
>
> The basis of this is, that there is an instrument plugin, kind of like
> Vestige, where you load external plugins to use as instruments. But
> instead of loading complete plugins like in Vestige, you just load up
> XML files which describe the instrument. There would be pre-defined
> synthesis modules, such as oscillators, filters, envelopes, controls,
> etc. and these can be defined in the XML file, and connected to each
> other in any way imaginable. For example, say you wanted to do an FM
> synthesis plugin - you add two "oscillator" modules, connect the output
> of one to the "frequency" input of other, add some controls to control
> them...
>
> The specs would be completely open, so other music softwares could
> implement their own implementations of a DIMSPF interpreter, and one
> could be developed in stand-alone/Jack format or LV2 format...
>
> Then we'd develop a simple GUI application for putting together these
> XML files that describe the instrument, and there would be an explosion
> of open-source, cross-platform virtual instruments.
>
> The disadvantage is the limitations of the modular synthesis model (you
> can only use the models that are available), and maybe a slight
> performance cost (but not a big one, since we wouldn't really be using
> an interpreted language... the modules would be in native code,
> implemented by the host, and the XML would only define how many of each
> module there are and how they connect together).
>
> The advantages would be clear: a plugin model that works on every
> platform, is easy to develop for - even people unfamiliar with
> programming can do it...
>
> We could also make it versioned and add new synthesis modules in future
> versions. A committee could eventually be formed, developers from other
> music software invited, to flesh out the standard, decide what gets added.
>
> What do you think of this idea?
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -- CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> LMMS-devel mailing list
> LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel