Thanks acid
XHip--Please finish your synth!!
-
- KVRist
- 50 posts since 1 Dec, 2005
Over one and a half years since the start of this thread, 87 pages, and two months since the last post begs the question...
Is this thing done yet!?
Or has aciddose just moved on to other shiny things?
Is this thing done yet!?
Or has aciddose just moved on to other shiny things?
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
other shiny things. really the synth is already done. the only features that will ever be changed will be basic things like small changes to the gui, maybe other guis, and utility things like allowing you to configure ranges and offsets for cc mapping rather than having the cc just map directly to the parameters like cc->automation.
you can do all the same things using automation plugins and various hosts like ext, so really there is nothing left to be done. i've become a lot more interested in making money out of the time i invest in this sort of stuff and i've been working on hardware rather than software. the market out there for something like xhip is really, really not practical. if you actually look at the quality of this software without looking at the gui or whatnot, it's simply a step above everything else. it's in the top-of-the-league range and there is absolutely no other software which covers the "general subtractive" area which is covered by xhip. you can find a whole lot of stuff like moog emulations and so on, but those are very timbre-specific. xhip is pretty well the only simple, easy to use subtractive synth with a clean gui and the same top-notch quality and enormous range of timbre/tone - yet there is no market for it. i'm really not interested in competing on the issues that the market demands, so software users can honestly get f**ked. (commercially speaking.)
when i'm interested to dabble here and there i'll certainly get back toward xhip. i haven't really done any work in my free-time on software other than software that ties into hardware; the firmware to run on my on-board processors for midi and various electronics and other related utilities.
somebody had suggested i allow for the key-track to go more than 100% - the synth is locked down now so you're pretty well out of luck. if you'd like to use one of the bits of software which allow you to send automation in excess of the 1.0 range however, using a -1.0 to 2.0 range "should" give you -200% to +200% key-track, for example. nothing in the synth is going to be changed now.
there really is maybe a few hours worth (one day on a weekend) of work to finish the modular gui stuff (allowing skins) and implement the cc/other routing "event routing" code. i'm just honestly not motivated.
xhip's source is available to anyone who'd like to have a go at it, under the condition source written to work with it be released bsd-style at minimum to myself if not to the public. xhip's source is absolutely NOT licensed to anyone for any use meaning that basically you'd be filling in for me and giving me control of any source you write. this would be merely to ensure that funny-business can't take place, for example a branch of gpl-xhip or something like that wouldn't be acceptable to me. for those interested in using xhip to learn or snipping bits of source, if that were to be discussed with me i'd allow it and i have in the past.
you can do all the same things using automation plugins and various hosts like ext, so really there is nothing left to be done. i've become a lot more interested in making money out of the time i invest in this sort of stuff and i've been working on hardware rather than software. the market out there for something like xhip is really, really not practical. if you actually look at the quality of this software without looking at the gui or whatnot, it's simply a step above everything else. it's in the top-of-the-league range and there is absolutely no other software which covers the "general subtractive" area which is covered by xhip. you can find a whole lot of stuff like moog emulations and so on, but those are very timbre-specific. xhip is pretty well the only simple, easy to use subtractive synth with a clean gui and the same top-notch quality and enormous range of timbre/tone - yet there is no market for it. i'm really not interested in competing on the issues that the market demands, so software users can honestly get f**ked. (commercially speaking.)
when i'm interested to dabble here and there i'll certainly get back toward xhip. i haven't really done any work in my free-time on software other than software that ties into hardware; the firmware to run on my on-board processors for midi and various electronics and other related utilities.
somebody had suggested i allow for the key-track to go more than 100% - the synth is locked down now so you're pretty well out of luck. if you'd like to use one of the bits of software which allow you to send automation in excess of the 1.0 range however, using a -1.0 to 2.0 range "should" give you -200% to +200% key-track, for example. nothing in the synth is going to be changed now.
there really is maybe a few hours worth (one day on a weekend) of work to finish the modular gui stuff (allowing skins) and implement the cc/other routing "event routing" code. i'm just honestly not motivated.
xhip's source is available to anyone who'd like to have a go at it, under the condition source written to work with it be released bsd-style at minimum to myself if not to the public. xhip's source is absolutely NOT licensed to anyone for any use meaning that basically you'd be filling in for me and giving me control of any source you write. this would be merely to ensure that funny-business can't take place, for example a branch of gpl-xhip or something like that wouldn't be acceptable to me. for those interested in using xhip to learn or snipping bits of source, if that were to be discussed with me i'd allow it and i have in the past.
-
- KVRAF
- 5851 posts since 9 Jul, 2002 from Helsinki
aciddose, good luck with your new projects & thanks for xhip.
I used to waste time considering this and that and what else, in the end there is sound and nothing else really matters... except beyond sound is music, and if there is any music to be made, it will be made with whatever is at hand.
it's f**king awesome to have xhip at hand.
cheers,
.jon
I used to waste time considering this and that and what else, in the end there is sound and nothing else really matters... except beyond sound is music, and if there is any music to be made, it will be made with whatever is at hand.
it's f**king awesome to have xhip at hand.
cheers,
.jon
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
actually now that i've gone over it from the "is it really finished?" perspective it does need a little polish. there are a couple oscillator bugs that come out sometimes, something related to sync + fm. they die also at times with extreme modulation and the triangle/sine waveforms are not 100% stable. there are also a few remaining small bugs here and there and it isnt bullet-proof in terms of when it's fed bad input data or whatever.
it also really needs the whole gui stuff finished, event/cc routing and some clean patch banks. finished patch banks would be really kind of cool for the beginners, especially the ones who can't seem to work out how to use the envelopes to eliminate clicking
http://xhip.cjb.net/xhip/releases/0/6/1 ... 6.15.3.zip
so, this above doesn't have much new other that the ability to function without an ini file.
- the ini must be in the same dir as the dll now, it doesn't have to be in the cwd anymore. (good!)
- you shouldn't even use an ini unless you need to load something other than default.xhipgui and default.adxb, so if you don't need to, make sure there is NO xhip.ini in the directory with the adxhip.dll
for most people: just copy the three files into your vst directory and make sure there is no xhip.ini in that directory and it should work fine.
at this point in time we really do not need this functionality (loading multiple interfaces or whatever) so i'll just outline quickly since nobody needs to know anyway:
the ini file must contain on the first line, the path to the gui module. on the second line, the path to the default bank. BOTH lines must be present, there is no error handling. the path given must be full, "C:/audio/vst/xhip/weirdgui.xhipgui" or whatever. note that if you don't give a path, or if you use "./" it'll just use the cwd which could be anywhere.
so now that this is working a bit better i just need to finish up the other features of the gui. no idea when i'll do that.
it also really needs the whole gui stuff finished, event/cc routing and some clean patch banks. finished patch banks would be really kind of cool for the beginners, especially the ones who can't seem to work out how to use the envelopes to eliminate clicking
http://xhip.cjb.net/xhip/releases/0/6/1 ... 6.15.3.zip
so, this above doesn't have much new other that the ability to function without an ini file.
- the ini must be in the same dir as the dll now, it doesn't have to be in the cwd anymore. (good!)
- you shouldn't even use an ini unless you need to load something other than default.xhipgui and default.adxb, so if you don't need to, make sure there is NO xhip.ini in the directory with the adxhip.dll
for most people: just copy the three files into your vst directory and make sure there is no xhip.ini in that directory and it should work fine.
at this point in time we really do not need this functionality (loading multiple interfaces or whatever) so i'll just outline quickly since nobody needs to know anyway:
the ini file must contain on the first line, the path to the gui module. on the second line, the path to the default bank. BOTH lines must be present, there is no error handling. the path given must be full, "C:/audio/vst/xhip/weirdgui.xhipgui" or whatever. note that if you don't give a path, or if you use "./" it'll just use the cwd which could be anywhere.
so now that this is working a bit better i just need to finish up the other features of the gui. no idea when i'll do that.
-
- KVRAF
- 2910 posts since 26 Jul, 2005 from dun unda
The main concern at hand is whether or not patch format will be broken on every concurrent version. I'm sure a few people including myself, would be happy to create banks out of XHip though I recall a while ago when version releases were at a height, formats got broken and simply put, time wasted to program a sound.aciddose wrote:it also really needs the whole gui stuff finished, event/cc routing and some clean patch banks. finished patch banks would be really kind of cool for the beginners, especially the ones who can't seem to work out how to use the envelopes to eliminate clicking
Anyway, all the best with the hardware project.
-
- KVRAF
- 12615 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
the whole idea behind locking down the patch format / synth architecture is to make patches compatible. the patches you make now will all be loaded no problem into whatever later versions there are - i may add a few extra features like for example the ability to set modulation mappings (cc to parameters, etc) inside the patches, but otherwise the core of the patches will remain exactly the same from now on. the synth is most definitely locked down.
-
- KVRAF
- 2910 posts since 26 Jul, 2005 from dun unda
That's all I need to know. Thanks for the insight!aciddose wrote:the whole idea behind locking down the patch format / synth architecture is to make patches compatible. the patches you make now will all be loaded no problem into whatever later versions there are
-
- KVRAF
- 2490 posts since 2 Jan, 2008 from denmark
thanx aciddose,this is a nice synth
http://soundcloud.com/subbasednb
YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/user/SubbaseDnB/videos
SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BUY MY SAMPLEPACK
http://www.teamdnr.net/distorted-drums/
YOUTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/user/SubbaseDnB/videos
SHOW YOUR SUPPORT BUY MY SAMPLEPACK
http://www.teamdnr.net/distorted-drums/
-
- KVRist
- 276 posts since 7 Jul, 2003 from Australia
This is a really great synth. I'm not quite sure I agree with your logic of not selling it. I think you should go for it, get some gui help and you're good to go. It sounds bloody great!
A couple of months ago I was looking for a vsti to purchase and this one would have definately made my shortlist, if i hadn't just purchased it outright that is!
Oh well, happy with a freebie
A couple of months ago I was looking for a vsti to purchase and this one would have definately made my shortlist, if i hadn't just purchased it outright that is!
Oh well, happy with a freebie
-
- KVRist
- 50 posts since 1 Dec, 2005
Whoohoot!MaliceX wrote:That's all I need to know. Thanks for the insight!aciddose wrote:the whole idea behind locking down the patch format / synth architecture is to make patches compatible. the patches you make now will all be loaded no problem into whatever later versions there are
Yes - thank you aciddose! This is good news.
Thanks too for turning a little bit more attention to this great synth. Now that patch compatibility is lcoked i think we will see some nice preset banks for this, and a growing popularity amongst the masses
I totally agrea with what you said in your response about this synth being in its own league. But I think you underestimate the matter in terms of it not being practical commercially (that is if by practicle you mean commercially viable, and not practical as in the amount of time/attention that you would need to expend should you charge for it?). People would pay for this synth, especially once preset banks start becoming available, and as a new GUI appears (current one just fine IMO)
At any rate, thank you again and success with your new shiny object - let's hope it brings you many many more shiny objects