Re: [Linuxsampler-devel] Suupporting various sample library formats and engines

[Steve H. <S.W...@ec...>]

On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 07:37:36 +0100, Benno Senoner wrote:
> The question is: do we build a single "one-size-fits-all" engine and
> write loaders for various sample formats
> trying to fit the original sample parameters (filters,envelopes etc) in
> such a way that they sound as close as on the
> original or is is better to implement separate engines for each type of
> sample library (eg akai s1000, SF2, GIGA, etc).
> associated with the related sample loader.

I think that the best approach is to make the sample loaders mini engines,
all the things like how the sampler handles note off etc. will vary a lot
from sampler to sampler.

If we just make the engine provide the MIDI routing and parsing, and deal
with jack i/o stuff then the individual sub engines can do whatever they
like*.

It also means we can get up and running with a single sampler format
without compromising the design, as long as the interface between the main
engine and the sub engines in general enough.

If the sub engines want to use recompilation techniques then the main
engine can just export an API to handle that.

* ...although this makes me think, playing devil advocate, maybe we should
not be aiming for one giant engine that will handle every sample format
known to man, maybe we should make a "sampler construction kit", that
allows people to bolt on thier sample loading code and sampler emulating
code and build a sampler out of that. It would encourage lots of simple,
special purpose tools and avoid toolkit issues

- Steve