om-synth
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Om-synth] Re: midi control of effects


From: Dave Robillard
Subject: Re: [Om-synth] Re: midi control of effects
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 17:37:06 -0400

On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 14:03 -0700, Scott Davidson wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2006 22:39:17 +0200, "Lars Luthman"
> <address@hidden> said:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 12:55 -0600, Jake Michaelson wrote:
> > > Thanks for the quick response, Dave. I like your idea - I would  
> > > describe this new node as a toggle switch: on the left of the node  
> > > one audio in and one MIDI in, on the right side of the node two audio  
> > > outs.  Only one audio out would be active at any given time, and if  
> > > the node receives the specified MIDI message, it toggles between the  
> > > outs.  To get my desired result I could use this "theoretical node"  
> > > as follows: one audio out could route directly into the master PCM  
> > > out (pass-through) and the other could route through an effects patch  
> > > and finally end up at the same PCM master out.  Sending a MIDI  
> > > message would simply toggle these routes (effect applied/no effect  
> > > applied).
> > 
> > It sounds a bit too specific - I'd rather see a node with a single MIDI
> > input (and possibly a control input to select the program number) and a
> > single audio output, where the audio output signal is a gate that is
> > controlled by MIDI PCs. Then it could be used with a mixer plugin or
> > some signal logic to create the effect/bypass thing.
> > 
> > Not that I would be opposed to anyone writing a plugin like the one you
> > described, of course.
> > 
> >
> 
> I like the plugin/gate idea and I respect the fact that the Node is
> intended to be relatively naive. However, wouldn't the original plugin
> node you are trying to bypass still be eating up processor cycles? Seems
> like this could get expensive, depending on the plugin. I guess you
> could put the plugin in a patch and use the existing patch-bypass
> functionality in conjunction with the plugin/gate, but that might get
> cumbersome.

External plugin nodes have zero runtime overhead over internal ones, if
that's what you mean.

-DR-





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]