Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Saturday, January 15, 2011 - 2:03 pm

--20cf3054a2854fd47b0499e3050f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 6:35 PM, linuxdsp wrote:

>

Well, saying there are pitfalls to blind black box dsp development begs the
question - where does one gain the basic knowledge as to eliminate some of
this blindness? I'd hazard a guess and say that there are quite a few people
here who are to some extent autodidacts, and who often learn from
experience. A well documented and precise example developed in a graphical
development environment would go much farther than a DSP textbook in this
case. I have a great deal of respect for the training and skill of a good
DSP programmer, but in reality, there are not that many of them, and most of
them are busy trying to eek out a living to pay for the knowledge that was
so hard gained. For the rest of us, we either have to wait for the gurus to
release stuff, or learn by experimenting. A GUI toolkit lowers the barrier
to entry significantly. Or to put it another way, given a choice between
having to learn DSP theory plus C/C++ or DSP theory through documented
visual examples in the same toolkit that will produce plugins, I'd choose
the latter given my time constraints, and given the fact that I find it much
easier to "read" the logic of visual patching than I do text based code.

> 3) Synthedit's ability to just churn out a finished .dll meant that

Fully acknowledged, and many of them were/are CPU hogs to boot.

> All of this is not to say that the tools should not be available to do such

I don't think there needs to be such a hard divide between users and
developers (though of course I've got nothing to lose and no frustration to
gain from cowboys riding into this particular town, mostly because it's not
my town). Even among amateurs, there will always be good amateurs and not so
good amateurs. The value of community is that people share not just the
plugins but their opinions about them. Among the synthedit users/developers,
certain of them gained a reputation based on the quality of their output.
And that quality was no doubt dependent on DSP skills and knowledge. Again,
I personally fully appreciate that DSP is not easy. But I do believe it can
be more fun and more accessible. For most people, it seems having fun is
more important than being exact, and may actually help them learn to be more
exact in the process.

All that being said, I have to admit to a certain degree of devil's
advocacy. I actually agree with Dave that even given the current set of
existing linux audio tools, one is only limited by one's imagination. The
tools that are out there now are more than technically capable of spurring
my imagination. The question is open as to how enjoyable that spurring might
be in the implementation.

-michael

--20cf3054a2854fd47b0499e3050f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 6:35 PM, linuxdsp <mike@linuxdsp.co.uk<=
/a>> wrote:

=A02) Blindly using the 'black box' approach to constructing comple=
x DSP processing can have its pitfalls if you don't have a grasp of (at=
least the theory) of what is going on inside the boxes - for example in sy=
nthedit you might wire up a bunch of filters (say to make a multiband compr=
essor) without a clue about the correct way to manage the phase alignment o=
f the filters with the result that your great new plugin actually has huge =
deep notches in the frequency response when it should sum back to flat (Not=
e: this is also a problem with just re-using plugins and libraries in other=
ways - my recent tests using JAMIN suggest exactly this problem happens wh=
en using the IIR multiband)
Well, saying there are pitfalls to blind b=
lack box dsp development begs the question - where does one gain the basic =
knowledge as to=A0eliminate=A0some of this blindness? I'd hazard a gues=
s and say that there are quite a few people here who are to some extent aut=
odidacts, and who often learn from experience. A well documented and precis=
e example developed in a graphical development environment would go much fa=
rther than a DSP textbook in this case. I have a great deal of respect for =
the training and skill of a good DSP programmer, but in reality, there are =
not that many of them, and most of them are busy trying to eek out a living=
to pay for the knowledge that was so hard gained. For the rest of us, we e=
ither have to wait for the gurus to release stuff, or learn by experimentin=
g. A GUI toolkit lowers the barrier to entry significantly. Or to put it an=
other way, given a choice between having to learn DSP theory plus C/C++ or =
DSP theory through documented visual examples in the same toolkit that will=
produce plugins, I'd choose the latter given my time constraints, and =
given the fact that I find it much easier to "read" the logic of =
visual patching than I do text based code.
=A0
3) Synthedit's ability to just churn out a finished .dll meant that eve=
ryone could start making plugins without any programming knowledge and supe=
rficially, out of the resulting thousands of free plugins, you wouldn't=
know the good from the bad (although if you look in your vst_plugins folde=
r after / while using a synthedit plugin you will normally find the tell-ta=
le signs of it dumping its little .dat files and modules out all over the p=
lace)
Fully acknowledged, and many of them were/=
are CPU hogs to boot.=A0
All of this is not to say that the tools should not be available to do such=
things, but perhaps people need to be aware of the potential problems, and=
to appreciate that although such tools make DSP seem easy, it most definit=
ely is NOT and requires a great amount of knowledge and experience to do (a=
nd understand) properly (and even then its easy to get caught out!)
I don't think there needs to be such a hard divide =
between users and developers (though of course I've got nothing to lose=
and no frustration to gain from cowboys riding into this particular town, =
mostly because it's not my town). Even among amateurs, there will alway=
s be good amateurs and not so good amateurs. The value of community is that=
people share not just the plugins but their opinions about them. Among the=
synthedit users/developers, certain of them gained a reputation based on t=
he quality of their output. And that quality was no doubt dependent on DSP =
skills and knowledge. Again, I personally fully appreciate that DSP is not =
easy. But I do believe it can be more fun and more accessible. For most peo=
ple, it seems having fun is more important than being exact, and may actual=
ly help them learn to be more exact in the process.
All that being said, I have to admit to a certain degre=
e of devil's advocacy. I actually agree with Dave that even given the c=
urrent set of existing linux audio tools, one is only limited by one's =
imagination. The tools that are out there now are more than technically cap=
able of spurring my imagination. The question is open as to how enjoyable t=
hat spurring might be in the implementation.
-michael

--20cf3054a2854fd47b0499e3050f--

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, allcoms, (Fri Jan 14, 10:08 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Sat Jan 15, 12:01 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, rosea.grammostola, (Fri Jan 14, 7:47 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, linuxdsp, (Fri Jan 14, 8:15 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, rosea.grammostola, (Fri Jan 14, 8:33 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Tom Szilagyi, (Fri Jan 14, 8:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Harry Van Haaren, (Sat Jan 15, 12:29 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, michael noble, (Sat Jan 15, 4:11 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, linuxdsp, (Sat Jan 15, 9:12 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, allcoms, (Mon Jan 17, 12:10 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 8:10 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, rosea.grammostola, (Mon Jan 17, 11:25 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jeremy Jongepier, (Mon Jan 17, 11:40 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Mon Jan 17, 2:38 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 10:12 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 11:07 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ricardus Vincente, (Mon Jan 17, 10:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 10:50 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Renato, (Mon Jan 17, 11:20 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Tue Jan 18, 1:42 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 11:46 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, michael noble, (Sat Jan 15, 2:03 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jeremy Salwen, (Fri Jan 14, 10:06 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Paul Davis, (Fri Jan 14, 8:58 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Dave Phillips, (Fri Jan 14, 1:21 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jeremy Jongepier, (Fri Jan 14, 12:27 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alexandre Prokoudine, (Fri Jan 14, 1:28 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Sun Jan 16, 5:24 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, S. Massy, (Mon Jan 17, 11:32 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, linuxdsp, (Sun Jan 16, 5:13 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, allcoms, (Mon Jan 17, 12:02 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alexandre Prokoudine, (Sun Jan 16, 5:30 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Sun Jan 16, 7:17 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Louigi Verona, (Sun Jan 16, 7:38 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jörn Nettingsmeier, (Sun Jan 16, 8:35 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, hermann, (Mon Jan 17, 3:16 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Paul Davis, (Sun Jan 16, 9:24 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Paul Davis, (Mon Jan 17, 12:11 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 8:18 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Louigi Verona, (Sun Jan 16, 8:54 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, allcoms, (Sun Jan 16, 12:06 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Paul Davis, (Sun Jan 16, 2:59 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Ken Restivo, (Mon Jan 17, 12:17 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Jeremy Jongepier, (Sun Jan 16, 9:59 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Paul Davis, (Sun Jan 16, 2:54 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Dave Phillips, (Fri Jan 14, 1:44 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Philipp Überbacher, (Fri Jan 14, 5:55 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, linuxdsp, (Fri Jan 14, 2:07 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alexandre Prokoudine, (Fri Jan 14, 1:51 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, rosea.grammostola, (Fri Jan 14, 12:37 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alexandre Prokoudine, (Fri Jan 14, 11:14 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Hartmut Noack, (Fri Jan 14, 11:08 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Philipp Überbacher, (Fri Jan 14, 12:25 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Louigi Verona, (Fri Jan 14, 11:33 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Hartmut Noack, (Fri Jan 14, 2:08 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Louigi Verona, (Fri Jan 14, 3:21 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Hartmut Noack, (Fri Jan 14, 5:03 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Dave Phillips, (Fri Jan 14, 4:25 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, allcoms, (Fri Jan 14, 2:54 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Rui Nuno Capela, (Fri Jan 14, 10:25 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, rosea.grammostola, (Fri Jan 14, 12:02 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Louigi Verona, (Fri Jan 14, 12:50 pm)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alex Stone, (Fri Jan 14, 10:24 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Tom Szilagyi, (Fri Jan 14, 11:03 am)
Re: [LAU] LV2, DSSI and the future of plugins, Alex Stone, (Fri Jan 14, 11:46 am)