For the last few months I've been working on this Synthmaker/SynthEdit like app. It all started as a proof of concept, something like a "let's see if I can make something similar" thing, which turned into an "I think I can make this to be different to what is available" thing, inspired by what I thought the other apps should be able to do. I've received lots of help from people of this forum, and for that I'm thankful.

A few days ago I decided to share some aspects of my app with the people at the "modular synthesis" forum, to check the reactions. Some guys were interested, but some of them actually stated that this kind of apps are a thing of the past, just more of the same and never fulfilling the expectations. What do you think? Do you use that kind of apps? Do you find them useful in any way? Do you think they have a significant place in the DSP world? Are they just toys? Do they just spoil people? Will the world end this year?

Here's the link to the conversation at the other forum, in case you want to check the reactions.

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=349354

BTW, the videos posted there are horrible!

DELETED

I don't watch much Youtube as I'm on dial-up, slow internet. I don't see anything describing your program?

Anyway, if it can compile to a Windows vst, my interest is there, cpu is the next factor. I only do this for personal use, I use a 32-bit OS, don't care about the trends(if there are any).

I think that the best advice was in that thread. Do some more research, ask people what they want, and think about how to really differentiate your idea.

It's there - first page, last post.

Modular VSTs is how I started learning DSP (ala SynthEdit). While it might not be an experienced software developers cup of tea, I really do like being able to dive into a modular and make things happen without having to write code.

Why would anyone say it is out of touch? Even to this day I still use SynthEdit and SynthMaker, the two most renowned modular VST creators. There is also Reaktor, which is very popular and capable.

The high CPU usage is just the reality of life. It's kinda like a compromise between doing it yourself and paying someone else: Someone else got it done faster, but doing it yourself got it done cheaply. Maybe someone got rich?

There is defiantly a place for modular synthesizers, whether they be 'real' or virtual, especially for those who want to go further than prepackaged 'choose a preset' 'rompler' type synths and sounds.

Having said that, a lot of visual programming languages claim the benefit of super-low-level programming. e.g. you can do a 'multiply' or 'addition' by dragging boxes and connections around on screen. Have you ever thought how tedious and silly it is to do a multiplication that way? ...vs typing "x = 3 * y" in a regular language like c++?
Designing say your own filter requires an advanced understanding of math. Dragging boxes round on screen don't make the underlying math any easier, Visual programming languages aren't better at low-level stuff. it's an illusion.
Same with any VPL that let you drop into Assembly code or script languages. Why the heck did you get a VPL if the first time you try anything sophisticated - they tell you 'just' drop into assembly language to achieve that?
I notice your demo concentrates on both low-level operation and scripting. I think *that* is the core of the criticism, probably unfair since you and I know the high level stuff will be built up from the low-level stuff. You probably just haven't got that far yet.

That's why my VPL, SynthEdit, is what I'd call 'mid-level'. Blocks are stuff like pre-built filters, amplifiers and oscillators. Stuff a musician can relate to.
If you want to go low-level in SynthEdit you can build additional 'blocks' using real C++, in a real programing environment like Visual Studio. The point being to use the best tool for the job, be that 'high-level' (visual environments) or 'low-level' ( C++ and ASM ).

Anyhow don't give up. The best advice I can give is: don't try to please everyone, first make a product you want to use yourself - that way you'll be passionate about it.

Jeff

I never used Synthmaker/SynthEdit myself.

But I know, that these kind of tools are very powerful. For example in the car industry they use a lot of visual tools for designing their steering software (mostly Simulink).

Actually there are some Swiss guys, that made an add-on for Simulink, which lets you make Audio Plugins: www.audioplugingenerator.com .

I think the important thing is to have a tool, that helps you with the "boring" stuff, like GUI creation and setting up audio in/out routings, but that at the same time lets you write you own C++ code for time-critical audio routines.

synthedit was my chance of "making my own sounds" a bunch of years ago when i found it

and as soon as my crazy ideas weren't quite possible with it - i realized i should learn C++
thanks to synthedit!

now, i'm still using it, but 90% of the modules are my own, written in C++
that's just one of the reasons why SynthEdit is great

Thanks for new tool!
Any approach to make advantages of low lever programming more understandable to a common man is welcome. To put programming in musical GUI is much more desirable approach that trying to learn Visual Studio with all generall functionality a sound designer probably never needs. That is why VstLua was the only enviroment where I could actually make something that worked. I realy hope that midi programming wil be able in Genera, if not so much like in VstLua, than at least some basic possibility to memorise components of midisignal to arrays and matrices. Lack of such basic midi support and lack of motivation to learn Visual Studio form scratch is the only reason why I never made something I want to work in SE. VstLua had a great tutorial that explaned midi programming. I hope that Genera wil have many scripts that shows C programing of midi. Maybie I learn midi programming in C that way.
Thanks a lot!

synthedit was a gateway drug for me, but now I'm comfortable with C++, graphical patching based "languages" appeal less and less. One thing that would appeal to me would be a text based language something a bit like Cockos' Jesusonic or Cycling 74's Gen~ codebox but with comprehensive GUI functionality and the ability to export a plug-in, with all the threading issues taken care of, like they are in Synthedit. If that plug-in was inherently totally cross platform that would be great.

See the FAUST Language:

http://faust.grame.fr/

From reading the documentation I think it has great potential although I did not actually try it out yet. Unfortunetely, it still lacks some important features like multirate processing (which is I think needed for oversampling), although proposals do exist.

I know about Faust - it looks good but I don't really like the functional programming style. Something that had more of a C/C++/Javascript style would be more interesting to me.

Simulink seems to be a graphical way to define a differential equation to be solved for an initial value problem (perhaps more than that but...basically that's the basic idea upon which you build your solution). Building a large system using it creates a lot of problems that you stare at thinking that "such a simple thing really had to be so difficult???". On the other hand, if you give a simple problem to a group of software engineers they'll make an hard one out of it anyway.

Thanks for all your replies! This confirms my initial thoughts on the subject - that VPLs have a place and there's always room for new approaches. It's just that the reactions at the other post confused me, but it could be my fault - VPLs seem to be more desirable for people involved (or willing to get involved) in DSP than in music production.