linuxaudio.org

--0015173ff3169495c304adf0fec6

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Ok didn't think that way, but definitely sounds interesting.
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Renato  wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:18:50 +0300

quoted text
> Moshe Werner  wrote:

>

> > I hoe that I'm not totally out of context,

> > but wouldn't that introduce latency to the control signal (AD/DA

> > conversion)?

>

> I guess yes, but since it's a control signal, it probably wouldn't be

> noticeable

>

> > Why would it be preferable over MIDI in first place?

>

> well the idea was to do DSP on the signal with the usual tools (ladspa,

> lv2, rakarrack etc.) which you can't do directly on MIDI. I.e. you could

> do things like filtering, distortion, delay, reverb etc. on the control

> signal, which you can't on MIDI.

>

> cheers

> renato

>

--0015173ff3169495c304adf0fec6

Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Ok didn't think that way, but definitely sounds interesting.On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:10 PM, Renato <rennabh@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 09:18:50 +0300

Moshe Werner <moshwe@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hoe that I'm not totally out of context,

quoted text
> but wouldn't that introduce latency to the control signal (AD/DA

> conversion)?

I guess yes, but since it's a control signal, it probably wouldn't be

noticeable
> Why would it be preferable over MIDI in first place?
well the idea was to do DSP on the signal with the usual tools (ladspa,

lv2, rakarrack etc.) which you can't do directly on MIDI. I.e. you could

do things like filtering, distortion, delay, reverb etc. on the control

signal, which you can't on MIDI.
cheers

renato
--0015173ff3169495c304adf0fec6--