Hi, part of this is also an answer to Paul's mail, but Dave has a longer list to work on:-) I haven't looked at the gui provided by this KVRaudio plugin. So these are "clean-room" thoughts... (Today we had a fire-alarm in our clean-room at work:) On Tuesday 08 December 2009 19:09:48 Dave Phillips wrote: > Arnold Krille wrote: > > But why use a VST plugin under linux to apply an IR when there is already > > jconvolver present? > > *me wonders* > Some reasons come to this mind: > > A functional GUI. Okay. But that should only apply when you change the mix-level or the IR, either its parameters, which results in a re-calculation of the IR, or the file. Both are probably not things you would automate inside a session. Unless the position of the source is a parameter for a big artificial convolution to simulate whole acoustic environments. I think most people just use an IR of some nice room to have a hall-effect... > Better sound. Why does the sound improve when I use a convolution-engine as a plugin opposed to using it standalone? > Choice. Choice of the convolution engine? Choice of the gui? Choice of the gui- toolkit? > I prefer the color yellow with my reverb's UI. :-) 'nuff said > VST plugins mean the world to me. Using windows VST's inside a linux environment is a valid reason for converts. Native linux VST's have no advantage over native LADSPA/DSSI/LV2 plugins. Except for the non-free license of the header/sdk from steinberg and the possible legal problems with the clean-room reconstructions of the api/abi. > Just some possible answers to your question. They are not necessarily > valid, true, or believable, they're just possible replies. /me writes "writing a ladspa plugin using libzita-convolve" on his todo- list:-) Have fun, Arnold
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
