SynthMakerFreeRideSkier ·
FYI a taste of things to come 🙂
http://www.dsprobotics.com/flowstone2.html
FlowStone V2
From the original SynthMaker forum (2004–2014), with its members’ names and dates.
trogluddite ·
Green and GUI code with DLL and API calls - Yes Please! Lets just hope that this comes SM's way too, and won't be a 'premium feature' for FlowStone only.
DigitalWhiteByte ·
I do not want too much to hope, not to be disappointed later. But if all this happens, I'm happy to put hands on my wallet.
OT: But at this point it would be better to insert a branch of flowstone with integration of development for VST? A Flowstone that has multiple licenses divided by type: Robotics only, only VST-Plugin, or both? So to integrate as an option to the package? With a discount to those who already own a full license of SynthMaker? So developers can devote to a single Master software, and integrate the various options? .... Pretend that I did not say anything .....
dutchound ·
are the video and image capture and processing features of flowstone something that they could put into synthmaker?
trogluddite ·
They could, just as they could put VST export into FlowStone - the underlying programming engine is exactly the same.
But they seem determined to keep the two programs very separate - not even to link FS users to all the help they could get from our forum here. This is why I have a nasty feeling that Ruby may well not come to SM.
I have made a few posts on the FS forum about this and other FS/SM 'demarkation' issues - never had any explicit response, and I know that admin is active there because he has been posting since I asked my questions. He seems only to ever respond to 'non-controversial' questions that he can answer Yes' to.
Similar when FS was first release - apart from an FS 'special offer' for SM users, there was no indication from Malc about why SM should be sidelined this way, despite several of us bugging him about it.
dutchound ·
I's hopeful that Flowstone will give a new impetus to synthmaker, because it is a new proving ground for the program which will offer the company new rewards for building on. If Flowstone revenues give the company new resources and enthusiasm for developing the engine, i think he will let any graphical enhancements benefit SM.
The engine in synthmaker is actually much better suited to robotics and non-sample-rate programming than it is to DSP, It is a very well designed program a graphical sense and bitwise it's overly complicated and quirky for flexible polyphonic audio data flow and Midi, it needs to be simplified so a bit is just a bit! if a midi bit, an audio bit, and a control bit, and an array bit are incompatible in the engine.......... we need them compatible! lets hope that he hasn't relegated SM's progress as i am sure it's earning fairly well.
the various color incompatible signal types and unit conversions (sample rate etc) mean that the data flow is only very slightly out of kilter, it's comes abit short of a easy and versatile programming experience that will spawn many creations, but it is nonetheless a fascinating program.
aliasant ·
trogluddite wrote: They could, just as they could put VST export into FlowStone - the underlying programming engine is exactly the same.
But they seem determined to keep the two programs very separate - not even to link FS users to all the help they could get from our forum here. This is why I have a nasty feeling that Ruby may well not come to SM.
I have made a few posts on the FS forum about this and other FS/SM 'demarkation' issues - never had any explicit response, and I know that admin is active there because he has been posting since I asked my questions. He seems only to ever respond to 'non-controversial' questions that he can answer Yes' to.
Similar when FS was first release - apart from an FS 'special offer' for SM users, there was no indication from Malc about why SM should be sidelined this way, despite several of us bugging him about it.
I have the same feeling about Ruby and any other good stuff that FS gets and I too really dont like them being 2 seperate programs. Its not like "I could buy FS too and get the FS goodies with VST export".... because that doesnt exist in FS 🙁
Very taunting knowing that they COULD give us all these posibilities but decided not to. It like buying a car. You could either get one very nice Turbo charged V12 but without wheels OR you could get one really nice 5doors with wheels but without steering wheel........
Is that really good buisness ??
philter5 ·
i am a little disapointed about this 2-product strategy, too. but i really hope for the future that someday they will make one big app with ALL the features of Flowstone AND Sm. or at least a additional option to convert FS to SM files and the other way/import SM files to FS. surely we have to wait some time until this will happend but it would be a logical step. BTW: has somebody made some expirience with FlowStone (free version) and exporting credits? i haven´t tried Flowstone much but i am interested in trying out some things. do users of the free version ALWAYS need to buy credits for EVERY single Export? if so that´s a real bad solution in my eyes. if i want to TRY a free software i don´t want to buy credits to use it! a better solution here would be some kind of NAG screen at the start of a exported exe, or at least some info that is has been exported with the free demo.
dutchound ·
Yes! when i have flowstone 2 i will be able to do stuff like this!!! it's a lego digital clock ... cool!!!
http://www.break.com/index/digital-cloc ... os-2205869
trogluddite ·
dutchound wrote: lego digital clock ... cool!!!
He he, the way it changes the numbers in stages is really hypnotic.
Mind you, I would start to get a bit paranoid if my toys started to be smarter than I am... LINK
BTW) I had a little chat with [name removed] today (CEO of DSPRobotics) - turns out he is a keen musician who has worked for the likes of Soundcraft/SSL. I feel a bit more positive about SM's future knowing that there is an 'audio DSP geek' at the helm - he comes across as a nice guy doing his best to give OutSim/DSPr a stable future - and his assurances about SM's future seemed genuine. As a gentleman, I will say no more than that, I promised that I would respect his wish that the e-mails be 'in confidence'.
MichaelBenjamin ·
trogluddite wrote: BTW) I had a little chat with [name removed] today (CEO of DSPRobotics) - turns out he is a keen musician who has worked for the likes of Soundcraft/SSL. I feel a bit more positive about SM's future knowing that there is an 'audio DSP geek' at the helm - he comes across as a nice guy doing his best to give OutSim/DSPr a stable future - and his assurances about SM's future seemed genuine. As a gentleman, I will say no more than that, I promised that I would respect his wish that the e-mails be 'in confidence'.
but that is just fluff talk - basically no information included besides the transmission of "feelings" with an addition of a statement of the repeater that says: "I will say no more than that, I promised..", which leads to the conclusion that there was either some actual useful information buried somewhere in the email conversation, or just more fluff, which cannot be solved because the "public speaker" is bound by his oath. reminds me of politics, but they just dont say that they cant say some other things, because they promised that they wouldnt. that leads to the question how useful it might be to mark conversations with clauses of partial confidence if you are in public secret relations. might be a marketing trick of psychology? atleast until proven wrong by actual information.
trogluddite ·
MichaelBenjamin wrote: but that is just fluff talk
Of course it is - nothing more than my personal impressions about the guy - I 'feel' a little more re-assured, and that is all - I mean to inply no more than that - the proof of the pudding will be in the eating.
MichaelBenjamin wrote: how useful it might be to mark conversations with clauses of partial confidence
Yes, you are right, not useful at all - and you are entitled, of course, to draw whatever conclusions you please, but I assure you it's little more than me being a dumbass, and not choosing my words more carefully. Of course, anybody thinking that I am part of a conspiracy of some sort will not be inclined to believe the following 'fluff', but for the record, here is my version of the events leading to my earlier post.
In an effort to get some answers to our concerns, I thought; "why just sit here moaning" and wondered if there weren't a better way to get OutSim's attention. So I posted some stuff on the FS forum where the 'admins' are still more active - leading [name removed] to contact me. He made a good impression on me (I am quite aware that one can be trained in these things) and, yes, there was some of the political fluff of which you speak. I learned nothing of substance. Nevertheless, my 'personal opinion of the discussion was that OutSim do care about SM still - but that there is some 'business plan' type stuff going on leading them to prioritise FS just at the moment (which we had pretty much worked out for ourselves already). Guess I am just in an uncharacteristically good mood today!
During the exchange of emails, he also voiced some of his feelings (some positive, some negative) about the critical tone of some of the posts about SM development (many of them mine). Those were his personal opinions, and if he wishes to express them here on the forum he is welcome to do so - but it is not my place to speak for him - he asked me to respect that, and this seems appropriate to me.
Do not fear, I have not been brainwashed out of my cynicism, nor will becoming a moderator turn me into a DSPRobotics 'Yes man' - my words and actions on the forum shall be the test of this.
Honest guv'nor! 😉
PS) @MB - Probably reads more sarcastic that I meant it to, you are one of my favourite forum people precisely because you are prepared to pin-point where my thinking get woolly.
philter5 ·
MichaelBenjamin wrote: trogluddite wrote: BTW) I had a little chat with [name removed] today (CEO of DSPRobotics) - turns out he is a keen musician who has worked for the likes of Soundcraft/SSL. I feel a bit more positive about SM's future knowing that there is an 'audio DSP geek' at the helm - he comes across as a nice guy doing his best to give OutSim/DSPr a stable future - and his assurances about SM's future seemed genuine. As a gentleman, I will say no more than that, I promised that I would respect his wish that the e-mails be 'in confidence'.
but that is just fluff talk - basically no information included besides the transmission of "feelings" with an addition of a statement of the repeater that says: "I will say no more than that, I promised..", which leads to the conclusion that there was either some actual useful information buried somewhere in the email conversation, or just more fluff, which cannot be solved because the "public speaker" is bound by his oath. reminds me of politics, but they just dont say that they cant say some other things, because they promised that they wouldnt. that leads to the question how useful it might be to mark conversations with clauses of partial confidence if you are in public secret relations. might be a marketing trick of psychology? atleast until proven wrong by actual information.
word!
trogluddite ·
philter5 wrote: word!
He he - we have to find something to do while we kill the time waiting for th next update! 😉
philter5 ·
trogluddite wrote: philter5 wrote: word!
He he - we have to find something to do while we kill the time waiting for th next update! 😉
it´s all about time-stretching isn´t it hehe.... 😀
infuzion ·
trogluddite wrote: He he - we have to find something to do while we kill the time waiting for the next update!
How about learn Ruby? What are the best sites? BTW, what version of Ruby does FS come with?
trogluddite ·
infuzion wrote: How about learn Ruby? What are the best sites?
If you enjoyed my pixie stories a few weeks back, you'll love this tutorial - it is completely bonkers (there are elves and cartoon foxes). Sen.Joe McCarthy would have had a field day with the author's politics, but the guy really does know his stuff, and it seems real easy to learn from (I never really used an object oriented language before)... Poignant guide to ruby (BIG pdf)
I've just been messing a little with the bog-standard ruby from ruby-lang.org for some practice; there are loads of useful links there too. I guess that the FS (SM?) version will have its own little quirks for defining with input/outputs, and hopefully its own predefined classes/methods for the GUI etc.(the FS2 blurb seems to hint that this is the case). Will be interesting to see how they deal with libraries - hopefully they will get 'bundled' automatically into exports so that end users don;t end up needing a folder full of extra files. The Sketchup CAD software I have uses Ruby for its plugins, and managing the Ruby library files can be a bit of a pain (like trying to keep my VST plugin folders tidy, only a lot more messy!).
infuzion ·
trogluddite wrote: infuzion wrote: How about learn Ruby? What are the best sites?
If you enjoyed my pixie stories a few weeks back, you'll love this tutorial - it is completely bonkers (there are elves and cartoon foxes). Poignant guide to ruby (BIG pdf)
I've read the first few chapters, fun to read but too chatty; I need the info now in my head with no mess nor fuss. Besides, that author disappeared long ago & hasn't been updated with the latest Ruby.
trogluddite wrote: Will be interesting to see how they deal with libraries - hopefully they will get 'bundled' automatically into exports so that end users don;t end up needing a folder full of extra files. The Sketchup CAD software I have uses Ruby for its plugins, and managing the Ruby library files can be a bit of a pain (like trying to keep my VST plugin folders tidy, only a lot more messy!).
I never did like wrapping DLLs inside a VST. I'd much rather have 1 DLL/library for my entire system, not 200 of them inside my VSTs. Negates the reason why they are libraries.
stw ·
trogluddite wrote: Poignant guide to ruby (BIG pdf) .
This is perfectly well written for dumbheads like me... 😈 Thanks for the link. So Mr. insiderwhowonttellanysecretsuntiltorturedwithweeksofalcoholabstinence what is yout impression... is it worth spending time on leraning it? And of course this question isn't meant in terms of "is it good to torture our brains with more input to get a steep learning curve throughout our life"
trogluddite ·
stw wrote: This is perfectly well written for dumbheads like me..
Yeah - it's a bit too "Janet and John" for folks with previous experience of of that kind of thing, but nice and gentle for us noobs - the whole 'objects/classes/methods' thing is totally new to me - all the programming I ever did was like SM code/ASM, just a big list of 'do this, do that'.
stw wrote: Mr. insiderwhowonttellanysecretsuntiltorturedwithweeksofalcoholabstinence
He he, I'll have to change my name, that would look great embossed on my bank card!
stw wrote: is it worth spending time on leraning it?
I'll be learning it anyway, as I have other software that uses it - but In terms of future SM? I wish I knew, but here are a few thoughts I had...
Firstly, I make the assumption here that if FS has Ruby, then there is no technical reason that SM can't too - after all FS also has ASIO etc., so I don't see any fundamental problem with software implementation.
The new trigger system came to SM - I don't think many of us here were that 'wowwed'.- maybe it fixed a few minor things, but no real enhancement to SM's core capabilities. But at least we can see it as SM keeping 'in line' with the core FS code - an indication that, for now at least, SM has not been dropped. And also possible that it was laying the foundations for other things to be added that require the new system.
The core thing that differentiates SM from FS is VST vs. 'Control Technology' - I've only messed briefly with the FS demo, but apart from those things, there is little to differentiate the two applications.
So the question becomes... Is Ruby added to FS in order to better justify the SM/FS price differential? (Personally, I think FS is priced pretty reasonably - but then, I have a far better paid job these days!) OTOH, many people here have said that they would be willing to pay a reasonable amount for any paid upgrade that genuinely added new features to SM - instant money into OutSim's bank account. While they are chatty enough when you contact them with troublesome schematics etc., OutSim have never had a dialogue with their users about their business plans - and that seems unlikely to change.
As you may have guessed from the mood swings in my recent posts, I am as confused as anyone whether to be optimistic or pessimistic. Contact with [name removed] lifted my mood not because there was any news, but simply because it made a change from feeling that our frustrations were not being acknowledged - whether acknowledgement becomes action remains to be seen.. I'm sure I'll carry on using SM for tinkering, but I really need to see some enhancements to carry using it for anything more serious - much as I like the software (and the forum) my current projects are near an end, and they have pushed against the limits of what SM is currently capable of.
trogluddite ·
infuzion wrote: I'd much rather have 1 DLL/library for my entire system, not 200 of them inside my VSTs.
Yes, I can see where you're coming from in terms of system resources etc.
I suppose I see libraries more from the angle that they are just a repository of useful routines to help me code more easily. - though by 'bundled exports', I don't necessarily mean that they must be saved as a single file, and always remain that way. More that whatever plugins we export should be capable of 'invisibly' managing their own resources - without the need for us to get bogged down in creating installers (unless we want to), or making life awkward for folks who use our plugins.
I'm pretty tidy with my files and folders on the whole - but some people aren't. The plugins threads on the Sketchup forum are full (OK, I exaggerate a little!) of plugin dev's having to reply to users who can't get plugins working because they forgot to download the latest .rb file that is 'required' by a plugin, and there are some really pretty screenshots of directory 'footprints' that must be strictly adhered to so that plugiins can see the correct resources.
I really like the fact that an SM export can be a single file - just download it, plonk it in a folder (pen drive, CD etc.), and it just works - no installer, no registry mess, no worries about overwritten .dlls affecting their performance etc., and think that would be a good principle to keep.
MegaHurtz ·
want!
..Or just being able to do vst in flowstone?
Wrote something here? To have a post removed or your name hidden, write to [email protected].