On Wed, Feb 28, 2007 at 11:34:52AM +0100, Atte André Jensen wrote: > Loki Davison wrote: > > >I find AMS really, really horrible for modular > >stuff > > Interresting. > > I find ams much more intuitive and faster to work with than om (didn't > try ingen, is that ready to use?). It's hard for me to pinpoint exactly > what does the difference, but I find I can slam a really nice patch > together in ams in a matter of minutes. Hmm. Back when I tried AMS, I had huge problems to get MIDI input working, wheras with Om, it just worked. Later on the change to midi input nodes and 2 converter plugins (trigger and node) caused a short Huh? but makes sense. Ever considered creating patches for a multitrack MIDI composition in AMS? I do it all the time with Om and it works well: http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator%3A%22Thorsten%20Wilms%22%20AND%20subject%3A%22Om_modular%22 Subpatches rule. Still, I can't recommend Om, with it being unmaintained, with a choice between a horrible outdated version and an unofficial one with some strange bugs. Ingen is not ready for use. Last I heared is that you might be able to chain up plugins, bu no saving/loading. -- Thorsten Wilms
