For those interested in audio-specific languages, I've had some success with Vult, a transpiled language which runs everywhere, compiles to Pure Data and runs on the Teensy. I used it to make some really powerful, extremely performant filters.
Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
31–40 of 83 posts
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#32Looks very very cool. Does it compile to a VST. Would love to see an example with a gui ! My dream is to make a sample chopper I can use directly from maschine
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#33Looks very very cool. Does it compile to a VST. Would love to see an example with a gui ! My dream is to make a sample chopper I can use directly from maschine
Yes - the command-line tool will take a SOUL patch and emit a full, ready-to-build JUCE project that will create all the plugin formats (and a standalone app).
Anyway to do that in a Docker container, maybe a ci/cd pipeline where I can just push my code and get an VST as a build artifact.
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
been bit by another audio engine that had the same license and pulled a bait and switch. No thanks.
Hi, one of the developers here. How would it be possible to allay your concerns? I think we've tried to be as clear as possible with our intentions - how could we rule out such possibilities with our license agreement?
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
been bit by another audio engine that had the same license and pulled a bait and switch. No thanks.
Hi, one of the developers here. How would it be possible to allay your concerns? I think we've tried to be as clear as possible with our intentions - how could we rule out such possibilities with our license agreement?
I never want to agree to an EULA before starting to develop something outside of a professional setting. That's an immediate dealbreaker for me. But even if I did - I wouldn't be able to disassemble or reverse engineer your software (2.2)? Also - why are there so many clauses in the EULA telling me to obey really specific laws? Aren't these redundant to section 2?
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've had it running on Bela for ages now. This year we'll be releasing the SOUL network protocol, so that we can properly control remote "SOUL venues" on hardware like Bela (our current Bela network is a bit of a bodge to get it running). Faust has also had SOUL support for a while. Not sure what's new over there but maybe Stephane will see this and comment :)
Nice, it's great to see this project go from C++ rant to reality. Can't wait to never write C++ ever again :) On licensing, how will it work for creators of open source hardware? Will they still need to pay a licensing fee if they are targeting a specific device with closed driver IP? Or could there be an exception there? Do you also see yourselves supporting open low-level hardware (RISC-V, FPGA, ...?), and in that…
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#37Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
been bit by another audio engine that had the same license and pulled a bait and switch. No thanks.
Hi, one of the developers here. How would it be possible to allay your concerns? I think we've tried to be as clear as possible with our intentions - how could we rule out such possibilities with our license agreement?
It isn’t that I don’t trust you or your intentions now, it’s that intentions (and requirements) change.
You asked about allaying fears. Personally for me this means actually take-to-the-bank licensing that I could get through a legal audit, even if hypothetical.
Talk of “secret sauce” and future closed source and IP licensing of future maybe-must-have magic... that’s way too much future risk for me.
An example of what I think is good licensing is JUCE (https://juce.com). Everything from “free” to “paid with support”, all open source… but the point is I always know exactly where I stand legally, what I can and cannot do... and what I can and cannot do in the FUTURE.
Re: Show HN: SOUL Language 1.0 – A platform for writing and running audio code
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
been bit by another audio engine that had the same license and pulled a bait and switch. No thanks.
Hi, one of the developers here. How would it be possible to allay your concerns? I think we've tried to be as clear as possible with our intentions - how could we rule out such possibilities with our license agreement?
What secret sauce is this? What parts of https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL are closed source?