From alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz  Fri Feb 26 21:06:02 1999
Received: from entry.jcu.cz (IDENT:perex@entry.jcu.cz [160.217.1.111])
	by marvin.jcu.cz (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id VAA01020;
	Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:05:51 +0100
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 21:05:51 +0100 (CET)
From: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@jcu.cz>
To: Kevin Duffey <kduffey@inprise.com>
cc: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Subject: Re: Instrument abstract layer
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19990226082835.009604b0@mail.inprise.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.990226205640.10347A-100000@entry.jcu.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: alsa-devel@alsa.jcu.cz
Sender: alsa-devel-owner@alsa.jcu.cz
Precedence: list

On Fri, 26 Feb 1999, Kevin Duffey wrote:

> To be honest..the BEST support you can do right now is for the SoundFont 2
> banks. It supports a wide variety of multi-split, multi-samples patches,
> each bank having as many instruments as desired. Rather than re-invent the
> wheel, why not just use that format? Or at least one that can easily work

Because I have got InterWave FFFF format for example. I don't want use
some company/hardware specific format and I think that doing of
some universal format is imposible. We are playing mostly with cheap
hardware. Professional hardware have got probably more complex sound
description which highly depends on used components. The universal
instrument format is for me good utopia (dream only)..

We could probably only implement some very simple wave format for
wavetable synthesizers, but this format could be used with analog
synthesizers etc..

ALSA needn't solve all sound trouble all over the world.

							Jaroslav

-----
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@jcu.cz>
Academic Computer Centre, University of South Bohemia
Branisovska 31, C. Budejovice, CZ-370 05 Czech Republic


