Re: [Bug 17793] New: AudioNode.disconnect() needs to be able to disconnect only one connection

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Peter van der Noord
<peterdunord@gmail.com>wrote:

> 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?
>

As per other response - because I need to remember to do

nodeA.connect(nodeB, 3);

to connect to the clock sync input, rather than

nodeA.connect( nodeB.clockSync );

or something like that.  It just seems harder to remember a list of
numbered inputs/outputs than think through the scenario and provide some
other access.  But that doesn't prevent you from doing just that if you
want.


> 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.
>

I do well understand the analog modular synth model, and I understand that
in such a model there is no real difference between a signal and a control.
 That doesn't mean that CV control signals are the model I want to control
note ons all the time, despite some interesting effects that MIDI loses. I
think you can accomplish all these and more, although I think you're very
focused on your synth modules being single nodes.  I also want to make sure
we continue to have a digital programming model as well.

My point was that not EVERYTHING needs to run like that, that was all.  I'd
still much rather have a noteOn() (or start(), or whatever) method to
trigger a note than have to generate an audio rate signal all the time, and
I expect it to be more performant.

-C