I have a project I'd like to make available to all as open source if I had some kind of contributor backing. I've had an inquiry about it already. So I think th

I have a project I'd like to make available to all as open source if I had some kind of contributor backing. I've had an inquiry about it already. So I think the project could have value to people looking to explore sounds of instruments in the orchestra especially since it can be easier to get satisfying results with the system I am working on compared to expensive and clumsy systems already available. The problem I have is that just putting the code out there hoping that there would be interest is a bit like putting baby in an orphanage hoping someone will adopt the project when I would have to move on from it anyway due to no money coming in from other sources. I love free software and my entire software world IS free software now with pretty much no exceptions. I'd like to contribute back to a community that has given me access to some of the best software I've used to date. But I'm poor, hard to employ, and have skills or strengths that are in an unusual combination. I like Ton Roosendaal's approach with Blender. I've been following his story since the late 1990s when I was using Lightwave 3D. I bought his book and tried to use his software but could not figure out what to do with it at the time. I think the book was unprofitable for him as it was expensive to make. But I observed his software get more and more powerful to where I am finding it easy to use Blender today. I don't know if Ton has financial difficulties I sure hope not but it seems he has some kind of support. I'm not as talented as Ton. He could program great software without the niceties of Stack Overflow and all the learning help I have now. But because of the talents of so many people I can make reasonably good quality products from my software and have ideas to make it a lot better than it is now. I could do this over and over if I had backing. How did curl and wget make it? And so many other tools that are simply taken for granted. I really want to have creative control of the development of my software and I really don't want to see Adobe or Amazon to snatch it up, package it, and sell it as a service under my nose making tons of money where I am hoping to find enough work to pay my electric bill and subsidized rent. The framework I'm building could be adapted to so many different ways of making melody, harmony, and rhythm. There are thousands of files from great composers that don't get much play time which can sound very interesting in instrumentation that they weren't written for. The software can be a great way to explore composition style and get ideas. Although it can offer sonic realism I don't want the software to replace human performance. I really want it to be a starting point for developing new compositions worthy of being performed.