<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/10/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Graham Coleman</b> <<a href="mailto:gc@gehennom.net">gc@gehennom.net</a>> wrote:</span><div><br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
It seems like a cool way to do this would be implementing VST support.<br>Then chuck could talk to lots of plugins.<br><br>Not sure how difficult it us, but the "standardness" of it might make<br>it worth it.</blockquote>
<div><br><br>That would be nice, if asking for trouble; I think the VST standard isn't as standardised as one would like standards to be. For one thing we would need a way of getting a VST to report on it's parameters. This would also break the cross-platform nature of ChucK code. I imagine there would also be questions about some malfunction with plugin X where X costs 500 bucks and would be unavailable to the developers...
<br><br>The destroyFX stuff by itself makes little sense to me to port; many of those things could also be done with some tactfull controll of SndBuf (getting in the new habit there...). If we'dlike to get yet closer the first step IMHO should be a record mode for the SndBuf as a alternative for loading audio files?
<br></div><br>With a MIDI loopback driver and a straditional VST/AU/LADSPA/My_format host much of the same could be acomplished.<br><br>Just my thoughts...<br><br>Kas.<br></div>