In reply to:
Can you not use anything from the work that Chris put into MeV?
I did consider that, as I very much like the visual appearance of MeV -- it's very BeOS-ish.
However, in its current form, I don't think the code would be too useful; it would take a significant amount of time to learn how it's put together, which would've been better spent writing something from scratch. The only part I'd keep from MeV would be the grid/piano roll editor, and that isn't a particularly hard thing to write from scratch.
In reply to:
Cyan, have you used Sequitur? It has a few 'argh-features' (it's designed by a a-bit-more-programmer-than-musician) but otherwise it's very nice looking and the source is available if you ask Eric Hackborn (I've mailed him about it)
It's the "argh-features", as you so nicely put it, that put me off using it heavily. The whole design philosophy seems completely different to what I'm looking for in a sequencer -- mainly, it has many non-standard interface components (it appears the entire GUI is bitmap-based?), doesn't have conveniently adjustable track parameters, etc.
So, I'm not really sure that's the way to go, either. It doesn't seem like it would be too difficult to get a basic sequencer written, the most time consuming part is designing the interface. I did consider practically cloning Cakewalk or something, since that reduces the amount of design work required, but clearly that wouldn't lead to a very BeOS-ish application. It's probably barely legal, too. =P
The emphasis would be on getting the basic features up and running in the sequencer first, before adding any fancy stuff. One of my biggest complaints with the existing sequencers is that they seem to lack several essential features, but have many features that are unnecessary; e.g., they're not very "well-rounded".
In reply to:
I think all of us would be so glad to have a multi-track audio recording program that we wouldn't really care if it were a stand alone application.
What kind of features would you expect from a multi-track recording app? I'm assuming it'd need an integrated mixer with insert/buss effects (unless that's a separate app itself, connected via the Media kit's audio routing?).
What about audio editing features? If flexible audio editing (like Cubase) is critical, it may be more sensible to integrate it into the sequencer, like most other MIDI+audio sequencers on other platforms.
For my purposes, I don't require very flexible audio editing features. I'd almost be content with tape, if it weren't for all the winding and cleaning. So if I were writing it entirely for personal use, it'd be a fairly simple app that lets you arm audio tracks and record them in a linear fashion. Editing features, if included, may be similar to a simple wave editor -- the tracks would be linear "wave" views which you can perform destructive edits on, not clippings like Cubase. If editing features were omitted, then presumably the app would be designed so that you can load the individual tracks into a wave editor of your choice (e.g., it'd use standard wave files).
That being said, I'm not designing it exclusively for personal use, hence this post. If editing features are of critical importance, then I'll consider integrating it into the sequencer. If they're not, then I'll consider making it a simple standalone app instead.
P.S. I can't seem to get the quote tags to indicate who I'm quoting. Haven't a clue why...
|
Re: New MIDI Sequencer for BeOS
[re: filo]
