5 ms·
> What's interesting is that as processors get faster, audio plugin makers publish stuff that uses more and more processor. Uggh. I know how you feel. For a wh
by wallacoloo 11y ago
> What's interesting is that as processors get faster, audio plugin makers publish stuff that uses more and more processor.
Uggh. I know how you feel. For a while now, I've wanted to create some sort of audio processing engine (either a very versatile LADSPA/VST/AU/etc plugin or a minimal DAW) wherein all the different components that usually run their own code to generate/process audio are described as data instead (e.g. transfer functions), and then the host decides how to actually compute the audio. This would give lots of room to try new optimizations that aren't usually possible, and you only have to optimize one area of critical code, rather than optimizing each individual plugin. This is especially beneficial when trying to make conditional use of processor extensions like SSE.
- enqk 11y agoHave a look at the Faust project: http://faust.grame.fr http://faust.grame.fr
- Kristine1975 11y agoThis sounds a bit like what Mac OS X's CoreImage does for pixel transformations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_Image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_Image Instead of applying a series of filters individually, Core Image assembles a dynamic instruction pipeline so that only one calculation needs to be applied to the pixel data to achieve a cumulative effect... Regardless of the number of filters, Core Image assembles the code for this instruction pipeline with a just-in-time compiler