Re: [Hydrogen-devel] Release plan

[Esben S. <b0...@es...>]

Comix <co...@gm...> writes:

> mixer

I'd rather like the mixer to be a separate application. Any reason why
it shouldn't?. I really never use it, either. I use the mixer of
ardour, but I really want a standalone central mixer daemon which I
could connect to from emacs, from the shell, from a cursed app, from a
gtk+-2 app, etc and offering the same power as the ardour mixer.

I don't understand why each application wants to create a new mixer
again and again. Why not extend a general mixer?.

At least for jackified GNU users, there should be an option to disable
the mixer.

Same goes for the transport bar; why not have a central transport
daemon?; each client could connect and then one could control each one
individually or in sync.

And the sampler; why not have midi/osc out and then use a sampler
daemon in the same fashion?

I feel all this is too integrated; one app to solve it all. 

I'd like to understand the decision to integrate to this extent. 

Having a simple midi/osc editor with piano roll, tracker, drum and
portamento editor interface is really what is needed, in my opinion.

The beast application is close to this, lacking midi out, drum editor
and a portamento editor plus it got the extra weight of a modular
synth;).

I really like the delicious gtk+-2 interface to;). The core editor
could be a daemon as well; I think beast has this, letting you connect
with the tracker and piano roll interface - could as well be a qt
application connecting with a portamento editor.

This modular approach would gain us more power. 

-- 
Esben Stien is b0ef@e     s      a
         http://www. s     t    n m
          irc://irc.  b  -  i  .   e/%23contact
          [sip|iax]:   e     e 
           jid:b0ef@    n     n