[PD] midi to osc?
jack at rybn.org
Thu Jul 9 21:25:47 CEST 2009
As suggests Derek, it would be nice to have some parts of the help
reorganized. For exemple, the sound could be like this :
It is just an exemple, there is certainly better.
And it will be useful for the beginner and the pro.
For the network, this will be the same with [netsend] [netreceive]
[udpsend] [udpreceive] [packOSC] [routeOSC] [oggcast~] [oggamp~] etc.
Have you remarks ?
Le jeudi 09 juillet 2009 à 20:50 +0200, Derek Holzer a écrit :
> I knew somebody would have to complicate my simple, straightforward
> Why hasn't somebody made this the "default" set of OSC objects in
> Extended by now then? Or perhaps replaced the original oscx libraries
> with these in a non-breaking way? And why is it split into two different
> Couldn't these objects be wrapped to give the same name as the standard
> OSC objects, but with whatever "better" functionality the list gurus
> have decided they give? For n00bs, having to use two different
> non-standard/non-default libs is just super confusing, and distracts
> from the task at hand, which is not to goof around with configuring Pd
> and/or importing libs but to communicate between two OSC apps.
> Also for writing the FLOSS Manual, a "correct" chapter on OSC now means
> either Path or [import] has to be discussed first, and then two
> different libs must be used. Big fat bummer!
> Can anybody say (in a few sentences rather than a lengthly thread) why
> one wouldn't use the simpler OSC objects for such a simple task? Points
> for brevity, nobody gets paid by the word around here ;-)
> IOhannes m zmölnig wrote:
> > i agree with everything derek has said, but one thing:
> > do NOT use oscx for OSC-communication.
> > instead use mrpeach's net and osc libraries.
> > [packOSC]+[udpsend] for sending osc
> > [udpreceive]+[unpackOSC] for receiving osc
> > for the reasons see the archives of this list...
More information about the Pd-list