On 4/28/21 12:30 AM, Len Ovens wrote:
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
https://digico.biz/digico-opens-up-the-sd-range-with-generic-osc-control/
This caught my eye... hoping that "generic OSC" might be some standard
for what controls should be called. But no. The biggest strength of OSC
is that it can do anything... but that is also it's biggest weakness.
There are many control applications that could benefit from standardized
messages but every DAW and controller requires setting up a control map
to fit the two together.
Yeah, I used to be critical of that, too. But OTOH, as soon as you start
doing something remotely complex with MIDI, you really hack the living
sh*t out of the generic MIDI vocabulary (consider such atrocities as 14
bit controllers).
In that sense, OSC is just like XML, not HTML or anything - it has no
"meaning", just syntax, but I consider that its strength. But it also
means that it's not going to replace MIDI any time soon, for precisely
that reason.
<..>
I think this was because UDP starts to loose messages very quickly after
100 or messages at a time. This would normally not seem like a problem
but when you consider that any one strip (I prefer strip to channel) may
have over 100 parameters that may be transfered at once in the case of
banking or a scene change. Some thing I have fought with on OSC control
for Ardour. I have had to add a very small delay with each message to
make things work.
The Wing with TCP would not need this... but of course some OSC libs do
not support TCP because OSC 1.0 is UDP and OSC 1.0 never got past OSC
1.0 due to lack of funding. There was work started on OSC 1.1 but it was
never formalized and the documentation has vanished from the OSC site.
This means no bundles, no TCP, no # or ? just / and so many OSC
controllers are OSC 1.0 only.
Ah, that might explain why I never got OSC over TCP going with standard
tools - I thought I was just being stupid...
The Wing on the other hand is doing what I have started to do with
Ardour (while leaving the old methods alone).
/strip/number/send/number/control type value (ei.
/strip/5/send/3/pan_azimuth f 0.75 ) Except they use /ch/5/fdr f .782
The Wing is also using the same query mechanisim I have started to
implement in Ardour:
send /strip/3/fader to ardour and it will replay with
/strip/3/fader f .782
(it may also send /strip/3/gain f 0 if the feedback is set that way)
send /strip for a list of strips
send /strip/2 for a list of controls with value for that strip
etc.
The problem with /ch is that a strip if stereo has two channels and if
MIDI has 16 channels and if a VCA has none and yet they are all handled
the same way with similar controls. So much for using /ch as a standard.
Anyway, a standard for mixer strip controls would be very nice... and of
course mine is the best :)
Look at it this way: there is an amazing choice of standards :o)
--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Tuinbouwstraat 180, 1097 ZB Amsterdam, Nederland
Tel. +49 177 7937487
Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio), Tonmeister VDT
http://stackingdwarves.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
