Re: SoundFont/DLS2/Gig (was Re: [Linuxsampler-devel] testing of linuxsampler and cvs activity)

[<be...@ga...>]

Scrive Steve Harris <S.W...@ec...>:

> On Wed, Oct 29, 2003 at 12:19:49 +0100, be...@ga... wrote:
> > Ok, it is still monolithic (the recompiler stuff will come later,
> >  for now let's focus on good playback of existing sample formats)
> > but we will have no problems to accomodate
> > new loaders and engines because the Voice:: classes can be subclassed
> > to implement the characteristics of the engine associated to a certain
> > sample format.
> 
> I'm starting to doubt that the recompiling stuff is neccesary, the
> Gig/DLS2/SF2 formats seem to be quite expressive, yet efficiently
> implementatble, not even counting the XML+WAV formats used by newer
> things. I dont think that there would be much/any performance gain in
> using dynamic compilation, and how many peopel would want to design thier
> own instruments, when they could use standard formats have have greater
> compatibility?

Yes you are right and that's why Christian and others convinced me to
leave the recompiler stuff for now.
But since to quote Linus, our goal is total world domination :-) ,
we should never stop innovating or thinking about new ways to generate
and manipulate audio.
Let's produce a rock solid standalone version of LS and wait for
the user's reactions. As we know from other open soruce projects 
the feedback from the community will help us to improve LS to become
 a truly professional product that can play in the same league as
the proprietary samplers.

> 
> Its still a nice idea though, but maybe more suited to a softsynth.

Perhaps in future LS will evolve in something where the S stays for
both Sampler and for Synth ? Who knows.
Let's first working on build strong the fundamentals.

PS: let us know when you make progress with the filters.

cheers,
Benno


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through http://www.gardena.net