Maybe this is a dumb idea...

This forum is for discussing Rack Extensions. Devs are all welcome to show off their goods.
Post Reply
User avatar
BRIGGS
Posts: 2135
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
Location: Orange County California

19 Jul 2018

This has crossed my mind a few times.

What if Props opened up the sequencer to developers and the sequencer section became like a rack extension? Imagine a sequencer designed by Lectric Panda! I imagine the sdk would be intense, with loads of requirements.
r11s

User avatar
jam-s
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Location: Aachen, Germany
Contact:

19 Jul 2018

Just adding the option for devs to implement some minor functionality would most likely lead to the Props having to do a complete sequencer rewrite first.

Compared to this an improved combinator or mixer channel REs would be much simpler to implement, I suppose.

Edit:

It would also introduce all sorts of intricate inter-dependency issues that are a nightmare to debug/manage between different sequencer extensions. That's because all of those would be working on a common resource instead of being heavily modularised/sandboxed into their own little compartments.
Last edited by jam-s on 19 Jul 2018, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Loque
Moderator
Posts: 11175
Joined: 28 Dec 2015

19 Jul 2018

This was already discussed because of the lack of good working tools. Not sure if it was before or after the PLayers came...
Reason12, Win10

User avatar
fieldframe
RE Developer
Posts: 1037
Joined: 19 Apr 2016

19 Jul 2018

Not a dumb idea at all. I don't think making the entire sequencer replaceable is particularly feasible, but having an API to add custom lane types could open up a lot of possibilities.

In conjunction, I’d like to see an API for floating windows. Basically, imagine something like the spectrum analyzer window, but as a custom, pop-out display for REs to do things like waveform editing, etc.

Tweak
Posts: 125
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

20 Jul 2018

Imagine combining some of the ideas of the posts above. Rather than allowing SDK access to create sequencer functionality (although I'm sure it could be very cool), imagine allowing a new class of combining devices as Rack Extensions - people could write new and differently functioning combinators.

Basic premise here is that as a developer you get access to the combined devices properties (similar to how the current combinator works), and get a midi track in the sequencer like a normal instrument. People could write specialist pattern based combinators, or combinators with UIs designed specifically for the oversight and combination of well known devices and REs.

Devs like lectric panda or the Props could output sophisticated combining devices that pulled some of their most useful features. Like imagine a panda combinator with random buttons to affect all devices below it, or a Props combinator with the filter section taken from Europa visible, which could control multiple Europa and Grain instances below it.

Ahhh, time to stop dreaming about stuff :)

User avatar
C//AZM
Posts: 366
Joined: 20 Jan 2015

30 Jul 2018

It's a great idea!
I would like to also see different well modeled and emulated consoles created by 3rd parties.

electrofux
Posts: 863
Joined: 21 Jan 2015

30 Jul 2018

It would help if it was opened up to Remote like Ableton is to its remote protocol.

User avatar
Ixus
Posts: 283
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

31 Jul 2018

Would be nice, atleast if they wont update it next version... it could use a big update imo!

User avatar
ejanuska
Posts: 680
Joined: 27 May 2016
Location: USA

31 Jul 2018

BRIGGS wrote:
19 Jul 2018
This has crossed my mind a few times.

What if Props opened up the sequencer to developers and the sequencer section became like a rack extension? Imagine a sequencer designed by Lectric Panda! I imagine the sdk would be intense, with loads of requirements.
PSQ-1684

User avatar
BRIGGS
Posts: 2135
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
Location: Orange County California

31 Jul 2018

ejanuska wrote:
31 Jul 2018
BRIGGS wrote:
19 Jul 2018
This has crossed my mind a few times.

What if Props opened up the sequencer to developers and the sequencer section became like a rack extension? Imagine a sequencer designed by Lectric Panda! I imagine the sdk would be intense, with loads of requirements.
PSQ-1684
version 4?
r11s

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests