linuxaudio.org

--_84d9c5dc-b61b-44a1-aa89-253dd963fd83_

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Date: Mon=2C 12 Sep 2011 22:53:02 -0400

quoted text
> From: david@davidcornette.com

> To: linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

> Subject: Re: [LAU] A good Sampler

>=20

> On Sun=2C Sep 11=2C 2011 at 01:22:31PM +0000=2C Dale Powell wrote:

> > Unfortunately I don't know anything that fulfils the requirements thoug=

h.

quoted text
> > Best free library from timestretch I know of is the RubberBand one. Thi=

s has

quoted text
> > been incorporated into a few programs=2C eq SuperLooper and QTracker=2C=

 but don't

quoted text
> > think any of them allow yo to create and play instruments as it sounds =

like

quoted text
> > you want. As the library exists I guess we can hope LinuxSampler will

> > consider incorporating it into their program in the not too distant fut=

ure=2C

quoted text
> > especially if they see some requests=2C but would hold your breath.

> >=20

>=20

> LinuxSampler cannot use Rubber Band unless they change their license=2C s=

ince

quoted text
> Rubber Band is GPL=2C and Linuxsampler's license is incompatible with GPL=

.

quoted text
> They could of course try to convince the authors of Rubber Band to make a=

n

quoted text
> exception to their license instead.  I doubt either will happen.

>=20

They well do so as they offer cost based commercial licenced=2C so for a fr=

ee but not FOSS software who knows what they'll say.
"The commercial edition is available for use in proprietary

software applications.  The standard licence is extremely flexible=2C

and a budget independent-developer licence is also available for

individuals working on low-cost applications.
With the

commercial edition you also obtain the source code with the right to

modify it if you desire=2C along with 12 months of updates. Optionally

at a small extra cost we can provide ready-to-use binary libraries for

Win32 and OS/X.
The commercial edition contains essentially the

same source code as the Free Software edition=2C but provides more

flexibility in build environment and library support=2C including

support for Intel Integrated Performance Primitives and Apple

Accelerate/vDSP frameworks as alternatives to FFTW and libsamplerate

(though you can also use these if you have commercial licenses for

them).
For pricing and more details=2C please contact us."
http://breakfastquay.com/rubberband/license.html
Can be no harm in contacting them anyway=2C if it hasn't been done previous=

ly.
Or was the one mentioned by another poster (sorry forgot what it was called=

) also GPL only? Have to admit licensing isn't overly a strong point of min=

e...
Dale.

 		 	   		  =
--_84d9c5dc-b61b-44a1-aa89-253dd963fd83_

Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"

Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
&gt=3B Date: Mon=2C 12 Sep 2011 22:53:02 -0400&gt=3B From:=

 david@davidcornette.com&gt=3B To: linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.or=

g&gt=3B Subject: Re: [LAU] A good Sampler&gt=3B &gt=3B On Sun=

=2C Sep 11=2C 2011 at 01:22:31PM +0000=2C Dale Powell wrote:&gt=3B &gt=

=3B Unfortunately I don't know anything that fulfils the requirements thoug=

h.&gt=3B &gt=3B Best free library from timestretch I know of is the Rub=

berBand one. This has&gt=3B &gt=3B been incorporated into a few program=

s=2C eq SuperLooper and QTracker=2C but don't&gt=3B &gt=3B think any of=

 them allow yo to create and play instruments as it sounds like&gt=3B &=

gt=3B you want. As the library exists I guess we can hope LinuxSampler will=

&gt=3B &gt=3B consider incorporating it into their program in the not t=

oo distant future=2C&gt=3B &gt=3B especially if they see some requests=

=2C but would hold your breath.&gt=3B &gt=3B &gt=3B &gt=3B Linu=

xSampler cannot use Rubber Band unless they change their license=2C since&gt=3B Rubber Band is GPL=2C and Linuxsampler's license is incompatible w=

ith GPL.&gt=3B They could of course try to convince the authors of Rubb=

er Band to make an&gt=3B exception to their license instead.  I doubt e=

ither will happen.&gt=3B They well do so as they offer cost bas=

ed commercial licenced=2C so for a free but not FOSS software who knows wha=

t they'll say."The commercial edition is available for use i=

n proprietary

software applications.  The standard licence is extremely flexible=2C

and a budget independent-developer licence is also available for

individuals working on low-cost applications.With the

commercial edition you also obtain the source code with the right to

modify it if you desire=2C along with 12 months of updates. Optionally

at a small extra cost we can provide ready-to-use binary libraries for

Win32 and OS/X.The commercial edition contains essentially the

same source code as the Free Software edition=2C but provides more

flexibility in build environment and library support=2C including

support for Intel Integrated Performance Primitives and Apple

Accelerate/vDSP frameworks as alternatives to FFTW and libsamplerate

(though you can also use these if you have commercial licenses for

them).For pricing and more details=2C please contact us."ht=

tp://breakfastquay.com/rubberband/license.htmlCan be no harm in con=

tacting them anyway=2C if it hasn't been done previously.Or=

 was the one mentioned by another poster (sorry forgot what it was called) =

also GPL only? Have to admit licensing isn't overly a strong point of mine.=

..Dale.

=
--_84d9c5dc-b61b-44a1-aa89-253dd963fd83_--