|
From: | Marco Ballini |
Subject: | Re: 5.1 format |
Date: | Thu Feb 22 14:21:02 2001 |
I don't know what 5.1 is, but I think that the possibility of having
multiple inputs is a good idea.
This might allow developers to build, for example, effects even more
complex than a vocoder or, in general, to use more than one aux input as a
control signal.
Also letting machine developers having multiple outputs could be a nice
thing; just as an example, I'm thinking of a drum machine that as many
outputs, so that you can process them independently, still having a single
block representing it in the machine view. The desktop space is limited (as
monitors are) and two many machines make the network hard to read.
The problem that, with multiple inputs and/or outputs, every time you want
to connect two stereo machines together you'd need to make two separate
connections might be overriden using GUI facilities (lets' say for example that
this might be the default connection and that for other kinds you should use a
different combination of keys).
In my opinion one feature that makes a project long-living is the
possibility to add new functions, and a condition for having it
is letting every single developer the freedom to choose. What I mean
is that, as a general rule, having fixed parameters (such as the number of
inputs) might preclude future possibilities.
- I think that the reason of the great success of B*zz comes from the
fact that it broke the traditional tracker scheme introducing an element of
flexibility: the machine network. While its downsides, in my opinion,
are in its limiting User Interface that does not provide any other way
of editing songs than entering number (no piano roll, no
pentagram, no MIDI...): it doesn't let people choose.
Please excuse my bad english.
Best regards,
Marco
|
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |