How do you guys make your own plugins?

How to do this, that and the other. Share, learn, teach. How did X do that? How can I sound like Y?
Post Reply New Topic
RELATED
PRODUCTS

Post

daGuru wrote:Tim's code is unaltered by me. My code is the bridge between LADSPA and VST. Consult your laywer :)
Your code is still derived code. Consult the people who wrote the GPL.

www.gnu.org
Mere aggregation of two programs means putting them side by side on the same CD-ROM or hard disk. We use this term in the case where they are separate programs, not parts of a single program. In this case, if one of the programs is covered by the GPL, it has no effect on the other program.

Combining two modules means connecting them together so that they form a single larger program. If either part is covered by the GPL, the whole combination must also be released under the GPL--if you can't, or won't, do that, you may not combine them.

What constitutes combining two parts into one program? This is a legal question, which ultimately judges will decide. We believe that a proper criterion depends both on the mechanism of communication (exec, pipes, rpc, function calls within a shared address space, etc.) and the semantics of the communication (what kinds of information are interchanged).

If the modules are included in the same executable file, they are definitely combined in one program. If modules are designed to run linked together in a shared address space, that almost surely means combining them into one program.

By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs. So when they are used for communication, the modules normally are separate programs. But if the semantics of the communication are intimate enough, exchanging complex internal data structures, that too could be a basis to consider the two parts as combined into a larger program.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

daGuru wrote: ps. Are you willing to defend all the Linux users that use the LADSPA<-VST bridge?
What do you mean by that exactly? Whose license are you claiming this breaks?
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

'Interesting' standards anyway.

Synthedit : not 'real' development
Reusing GPLd DSP code but refusing to provide source the bits 'around' someone else's code : 'real' development

:roll:
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

Ummm, if you bothered to look closer, you'd see I have other plugins... Tim's stuff was ported b4 amp. sim. was even common. Also, I give 100% credit to his (years) of hard work (look at the crappy GUI for proof)

Post

I really can't understand this 'deguru' guys attitude to synthedit stuff. Some of my favourite synths are synthedit ones, i even prefer them to some of my $$$ non-SE ones. Way better than anything he has/could/whatever make. What a penis. the attitude reminds me of one of these people that won't take public transport because poor people use it or the seats are dirty etc

Post

daGuru wrote:Ummm, if you bothered to look closer, you'd see I have other plugins... Tim's stuff was ported b4 amp. sim. was even common. Also, I give 100% credit to his (years) of hard work (look at the crappy GUI for proof)
The GPL doesnt require 'credit' it requires that derived code has its source available.

And the fact that you've gone to certain extreme lengths to try and justify avoiding releasing your derived code is certainly unusual.

I certainly find that more dubious than something as banal as using SynthEdit. Doesnt really smack of 'the enormous amount of time/knowledge/study/dsp theory the "real" coders spill blood over' does it?

Lets try a rewrite.
To me, it comes down to deception. What would we getting? Someone with a little bit of knowledge connecting a few pre-written code modules made by someone else?
Now thats fucking ironic.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

Just one question? Where is your code/proggies @ whyterabbyt

I'd love to take a look :)

Post

His code ain't under GPL. He doesn't have to show shit. That's not the case for you.
Image

Post

daGuru wrote:Just one question? Where is your code/proggies @ whyterabbyt

I'd love to take a look :)
Why? Do you run a 3D render farm?
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

I don't need the source, just interested in the runtime

Post

Got some example pics for me? LOL

Post

It's all coming together now.... I see the light

I'm sorry, I won't beat up on ya no more... :lol:
Last edited by daGuru on Fri Nov 11, 2005 1:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post

Warmonger wrote:His code ain't under GPL. He doesn't have to show shit. That's not the case for you.
Well, thats true as well. Although I suspect its an attempt to claim false authority on the grounds that I havent shown code of my own.

Its a relatively common behaviour around here, especially wrt people's music.

Its usually followed by 'hmmm, I knew it'd be crap' as though they were ever going to say otherwise. Its very predictable.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

daGuru wrote:Got some example pics for me? LOL
What are you talking about?
my other modular synth is a bugbrand

Post

We leave it to the lawyers, ok.... Truce :)

Post Reply

Return to “Production Techniques”