why do applications prefer zipped xml's ?
what are the advantages and disadvantages ?
DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
71–80 of 93 posts
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I've been trying to write a VCS for Ableton projects but their schema is way too complex to try to make sense of it. Ableton is incredibly hostile to third party devs building upon their work. Eg: There is no official documentation for any of their Python APIs.
Although the python API could be documented, it was not meant to be a public API. And it seems the open source community managed to generate the documentation. I don't know any other DAW that allows as deep integration for third party devs through their Max for Live API.
If it was not meant to be public, then why do vendors who partner with Ableton and build hardware for Live complain about the lack of documentation?
The documentation generated by the community is severely lacking and it enables only elementary usage of the API
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#73It would be nice if Bitwig would support existing plug-ins formats like AU.
Or LADSPA/LV2 which is actually free.
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Idunno, half the instrument VSTs I have seem to support some form of microtuning or alternate tunings...
How do they achieve that?
I don't know what all the options are, but MTS-ESP is one. If I understand it right, it's a sort of out-of-band channel where you can apply tuning tables to all the MIDI synths that use the MTS-ESP API from one place.
I think it's not sent over MIDI so it only works if everything is running on the same computer.
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Eh, it's fine. With two decimal points of precision you're basically working in cents, which is a pretty standard way of representing tuning. This doesn't need to be a trivially human-readable format, but I think maybe it would be nice to allow for multiple pitch representations: floating point frequency, floating point fractions of a semitone in any arbitrary EDO, fractional frequency as used in just intonation, etc…
Isn't the issue that pitch bends in midi apply to every sound on that channel, so if you play a chord with a different temperament and send the bend data of each note the result is that the whole chord will be tempered as normal but with every note the same amount higher or lower? I've heard the recent midi 2 can get around this but it's still a pain with the 40 years of midi equipment that surrounds us.
Yes, that's a problem with MIDI 1.0. There are a few ways to work around it. Some synths support custom tuning tables, and there's even a MIDI spec for custom tuning tables called MTS that hardly anyone actually implements as far as I know.
One way that works for multitimbral synth (which a lot of 90's romplers are) is to only play one note at a time on each channel, and use multiple channels for polyphony. This allows you to individually control the pitch of every note.
The one-note-per-channel trick works okay, but it's kind of awkward. If you want to use all 16 channels, it means setting every channel to the exact same patch, which is tedious. Also, you have to know what the pitch bend range of the synth is if you want to bend by the exact right amount. So, eventually MPE was adopted as an official MIDI standard to provide an easier, more user-friendly and standardized way to do one-note-per-channel MIDI.
MIDI 2.0 has added per-note pitch bend. For anyone making microtonal instruments right now, though, I'd say MPE is probably the best/easiest option.
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#76Yes please!
I went for Mixcraft because friend has it already, but still struggling to make it running alongside Spitfire with wine. Spitfire needs win 10 but then no sound with the "low latency" driver in Mixcraft. Anyway… an exchange format would help me go native while keeping friends!
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#77oh my god thank you
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I've been trying to write a VCS for Ableton projects but their schema is way too complex to try to make sense of it. Ableton is incredibly hostile to third party devs building upon their work. Eg: There is no official documentation for any of their Python APIs.
Although the python API could be documented, it was not meant to be a public API. And it seems the open source community managed to generate the documentation. I don't know any other DAW that allows as deep integration for third party devs through their Max for Live API.
>I don't know any other DAW that allows as deep integration for third party devs through their Max for Live API.
REAPER?
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
This. I've been trying to write a VCS for Ableton projects but their schema is way too complex to try to make sense of it. Ableton is incredibly hostile to third party devs building upon their work. Eg: There is no official documentation for any of their Python APIs.
Although the python API could be documented, it was not meant to be a public API. And it seems the open source community managed to generate the documentation. I don't know any other DAW that allows as deep integration for third party devs through their Max for Live API.
REAPER has unsurpassed scripting and extension, every other DAW looks like a joke in comparison.
Re: DAWproject: Open exchange format for DAWs
#80epic project, one of my fav DAWs already supported too. So damn happy to see this. Hope Renoise will pick it up too though that one moves a lil slow :P maybe someday! just wanted to say thanks. this is needed sooo much!