- From: Peter van der Noord <peterdunord@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 23:46:31 +0200
- To: Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com>
- Cc: "public-audio@w3.org" <public-audio@w3.org>
Op 20 jul. 2012 om 22:06 heeft Chris Wilson <cwilso@google.com> het volgende geschreven: > That's my point - the only use of multiple inputs/outputs in the API right now is cracking apart the channels. I see why you want to have additional control inputs/outputs from a node - I just don't think wrapping those up in a numbered set of inputs/outputs is the right way to do it. > Why not? I think the key difference in our thoughts here is the distinction you make between a signal and a controlsignal. In a modular synthesizer these are all the same, there's only signals. Connections that transmit values. It doesnt matter what it is, wht matters is what the receiver does with it. That's what makes it fun and what makes such a synth an incredible creative musical instrument. I have modules in my setup that have literally dozens of inputs and outputs. None of them is specifically for control or for 'sound'. I can run audible sound into the clockinput of my stepsequencer so it runs at insane speeds and have it generate weird tones. I can set my envelopegenerator in loopmode and run it so fast that it's an oscillator. I can put gatesignals into a delaymodule, or strange filters on lfosignals... they're all signals. Peter
Received on Friday, 20 July 2012 21:47:02 UTC