Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
> > Jim lists: > >- don't go againinator > >- digital i/o > > s/pdif? USB? FireWire? > i was thinking aes/ebu but some thinking about which format would definitely be in order... > >- balanced analog i/o > > what for? I would rather like the jacks to be stereo. I hate to > connect two cables and keep modifying all of my equipment for stereo > cables... The line ins of my small Mackie are L/Mono - R/Stereo - > without any loss or cost, just an hour of work :-) i'm just one of those finicky audio freaks... but if you had digital i/o, then us freaks could use our own converters and get balanced signals. i agree that cabling is a mess. i am currently trying to figure out how my rig will be configured for live looping. i promised rick walker a show early next year... > >- stereo > > certainly > > >- expandable memory. > > certainly, actual SIMMs or flash card (more expensive!)? > i think both. internal memory on sims. i like the repeaters compact flash card idea as well... > >- flash os > > yes > > >- variable sample rates (lo-fi up to high res) > > what for? once RAM is sufficiently cheap? > One thing I think a lot about: To maintain Brother compatibility with > the old EDPs, it would be interesting to keep the clock at 41k. I > dont think this rate seriously affects sound quality. > But for further compatibility, we would have to have 44.1kHz, too... > another parameter? > i like going lo fi to get that nasty grunge (see? i'm not totally finicky...) i like monkeying with the clock rate on delay devices to get weird pitch/time shifts... > >here's an idea: if gibson is not interested, why not have an open > >source design project? > >i think enough people would be interested in the project to make it >happen. > >and then when the design work was done (an interesting term in open > >source, i know), > >gibson could run with it... > > The design is not owned by Gibson and the licence is not exclusive, > but quite some money and structure to develop and distribute is > needed... > Do you suggest that this effort would be made by the community, too? > if we followed dennis' idea of using standard computer hardware, then yes. otherwise i was just thinking gibson might jump on it if the design work were already done (less r&d) this had to be at least part of their thinking in continuing production after taking over oberheim, right? > The present structure of the soft would hardly allow an open source > design and I would not be willing to give away 8 years of work for > which I did not get back yet what I put into it... I mayb e wrong... > But as we worked up to now, quite some user wishes have been > implemented and this could grow further. > Once the upgrade is done, for example, I could imagine to assemble > personal EPROMs with special variations of the functions for a > reasonable money. > linux developers make pretty good money, don't they? especially the ones most involved in the design of the os... i think people would still pay for custom mods... have you not recovered startup costs? or are you referring to the time you have spent? i certainly don't think you should be working for free... (i realize that may seem a bit self-contradictory)